On Thu, Dec 04, 2025 at 09:07:56AM +0000, Mike Leach wrote:
[...]
I saw CTI registers are within 4KiB (0x1000), we can don't convert standard regiserts and only convert to QCOM register based on the standard ones. So you can drop the cti_normal_offset strucuture and only have a cti_reg_qcom_offset[] struct:
static const u32 cti_extended_offset[] = { [CTIINTACK] = QCOM_CTIINTACK, [CTIAPPSET] = QCOM_CTIAPPSET, [CTIAPPCLEAR] = QCOM_CTIAPPCLEAR, [CTIAPPPULSE] = QCOM_CTIAPPPULSE, [CTIINEN] = QCOM_CTIINEN, ... };
I suggested the dual offset approach a couple of patchset revisions ago as it actually simplifies the code & makes it more efficient. The offset array in use is set during probe and the remaining code is then common to both without lots of "if qcom else " occurences.
AFAICS, we will handle the QCOM CTI particularly in three cases:
1) The register access; 2) The claim tag; 3) Sysfs attr is visible.
Now we are discussing the reigster access. As suggested, the "if qcom / else" is encapsulated (e.g., in cti_reg_addr_with_nr()), it will not spread out.
I'd use standard registers by default and convert to non-standard ones only when needed. A new "neutral" index layer seems redundant, as the existing standard register indexes already serve this purpose.
For the sysfs attrs, it makes sense to use a central place to decide which knobs are only visible for QCOM CTI, otherwise, we also will not spread the condition check.
I will reply separately for claim tag issue.
Thanks, Leo