Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] esp_scsi: De-duplicate PIO routines

2018-10-17 Thread Finn Thain
On Wed, 17 Oct 2018, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Please leave the possibly unused exports as-is. > I take that to mean "leave the conditional export as-is". Hence, I think v3 (posted on the 16th) should address all of the concerns raised by reviewers... --

Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] esp_scsi: De-duplicate PIO routines

2018-10-17 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 04:39:07PM +1100, Finn Thain wrote: > > Perhaps I've misunderstood your concern here. Is it a problem that > esp_scsi.ko may or may not export the function, depending on .config? > > For example, if esp_scsi.ko came from a build with CONFIG_SUN3X_ESP=y && > !CONFIG_SCSI_

Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] esp_scsi: De-duplicate PIO routines

2018-10-17 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 10:52:26AM +1100, Finn Thain wrote: > True enough. We agree that this #ifdef is undesirable. And yet when I > tried it, I found an unexpected readability benefit to your suggestion: > > #ifdef CONFIG_SCSI_ESP_PIO > u8 __iomem *fifo_reg; > int

Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] esp_scsi: De-duplicate PIO routines

2018-10-15 Thread Finn Thain
On Mon, 15 Oct 2018, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > > However, the function declaration really is a worry, as the actual function > body only exists when the config option is enabled. > So either add a dummy function or surround the function declaration by > CONFIG_ESP_PIO. > Otherwise I think Dan Carp

Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] esp_scsi: De-duplicate PIO routines

2018-10-15 Thread Finn Thain
On Mon, 15 Oct 2018, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > > > > In the case of send_cmd_residual, that would mean a second #ifdef > > added to esp_data_bytes_sent() where it gets used. I'm happy to comply > > but I fear that all these #ifdefs may harm readability... > > > > There are already other variabl

Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] esp_scsi: De-duplicate PIO routines

2018-10-15 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 12:58:42PM +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > However, the function declaration really is a worry, as the actual function > body only exists when the config option is enabled. Having a prototype without an implementation is no problem at all. We have this case all over the ker

Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] esp_scsi: De-duplicate PIO routines

2018-10-15 Thread Hannes Reinecke
On 10/15/18 8:25 AM, Finn Thain wrote: On Mon, 15 Oct 2018, Hannes Reinecke wrote: On 10/14/18 8:12 AM, Finn Thain wrote: As a temporary measure, the code to implement PIO transfers was duplicated in zorro_esp and mac_esp. Now that it has stabilized move the common code into the core driver bu

Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] esp_scsi: De-duplicate PIO routines

2018-10-14 Thread Finn Thain
On Mon, 15 Oct 2018, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > On 10/14/18 8:12 AM, Finn Thain wrote: > > As a temporary measure, the code to implement PIO transfers was > > duplicated in zorro_esp and mac_esp. Now that it has stabilized > > move the common code into the core driver but don't build it unless > > n

Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] esp_scsi: De-duplicate PIO routines

2018-10-14 Thread Hannes Reinecke
On 10/14/18 8:12 AM, Finn Thain wrote: As a temporary measure, the code to implement PIO transfers was duplicated in zorro_esp and mac_esp. Now that it has stabilized move the common code into the core driver but don't build it unless needed. This replaces the inline assembler with more portable

Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] esp_scsi: De-duplicate PIO routines

2018-10-14 Thread Finn Thain
On Sun, 14 Oct 2018, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > --- a/drivers/scsi/Kconfig > > +++ b/drivers/scsi/Kconfig > > @@ -42,6 +42,10 @@ config SCSI_DMA > > bool > > default n > > > > +config SCSI_ESP_PIO > > + bool > > + default n > > "default n" is the default, so plea

Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] esp_scsi: De-duplicate PIO routines

2018-10-14 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
Hi Finn, On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 8:35 AM Finn Thain wrote: > As a temporary measure, the code to implement PIO transfers was > duplicated in zorro_esp and mac_esp. Now that it has stabilized > move the common code into the core driver but don't build it unless > needed. > > This replaces the inli