On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 06:11:50AM -0500, Zhi Wang wrote:
> + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = iter->i915;
> + u32 *mmio, i;
> +
> + for (i = offset; i < offset + size; i += 4) {
> + mmio = iter->data + i;
> + *mmio = intel_uncore_read_notrace(to_gt(dev_priv)->uncore,
> + _MMIO(i));
This reads much stranger than:
u32 *mmio = iter->data;
for (i = offset; i < offset + size; i += 4) {
mmio[i] = intel_uncore_read_notrace(to_gt(dev_priv)->uncore,
_MMIO(i));
}
> +static int handle_mmio(struct intel_gvt_mmio_table_iter *iter,
> + u32 offset, u32 device, u32 size)
> +{
> + if (WARN_ON(!IS_ALIGNED(offset, 4)))
> + return -EINVAL;
Shouldn't this be in the caller of the method?
> + save_mmio(iter, offset, size);
> + return 0;
Now that the block callback is gone save_mmio and handle_mmio
can be merged.
> + mem = vzalloc(2 * SZ_1M);
Don't we want a driver-wide constant for this instead of a magic number?
