> Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 3/5] PCI: xilinx: Modifying AXI PCIe Host Bridge driver
> to work on both Zynq and Microblaze
>
> On Tuesday 12 January 2016 23:06:11 Bharat Kumar Gogada wrote:
> > Modifying Xilinx AXI PCIe Host Bridge Soft IP driver to work on both
> > Zynq and Microblaze Architectures.
> > With these modifications drivers/pci/host/pcie-xilinx.c, will work on
> > both Zynq and Microblaze Architectures.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Bharat Kumar Gogada <bharatku@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Ravi Kiran Gummaluri <rgummal@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> I think this patch should be split into three, as you are doing three unrelated
> things here.
>
Agreed, will send as different patches in next series.
> > ---
> > --- a/drivers/pci/host/pcie-xilinx.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/host/pcie-xilinx.c
> > @@ -92,7 +92,12 @@
> > #define ECAM_DEV_NUM_SHIFT 12
> >
> > /* Number of MSI IRQs */
> > -#define XILINX_NUM_MSI_IRQS 128
> > +#define XILINX_NUM_MSI_IRQS 128
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM
> > +#define TOT_NR_IRQS XILINX_NUM_MSI_IRQS
> > +#else
> > +#define TOT_NR_IRQS (NR_IRQS + XILINX_NUM_MSI_IRQS)
> > +#endif
>
> Something looks wrong here in the microblaze variant. What does NR_IRQS
> have to do with it?
>
> > @@ -238,15 +243,20 @@ static void xilinx_pcie_destroy_msi(unsigned int
> irq)
> > */
> > static int xilinx_pcie_assign_msi(struct xilinx_pcie_port *port) {
> > + int irq;
> > int pos;
> >
> > pos = find_first_zero_bit(msi_irq_in_use, XILINX_NUM_MSI_IRQS);
> > - if (pos < XILINX_NUM_MSI_IRQS)
> > + irq = pos;
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_MICROBLAZE
> > + irq = XILINX_NUM_MSI_IRQS + pos;
> > +#endif
>
>
> if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MICROBLAZE))
> irq = XILINX_NUM_MSI_IRQS + pos;
>
Agreed.
> > @@ -705,7 +715,9 @@ static int xilinx_pcie_probe(struct
> > platform_device *pdev) #endif
> > pci_scan_child_bus(bus);
> > pci_assign_unassigned_bus_resources(bus);
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM
> > pci_fixup_irqs(pci_common_swizzle, of_irq_parse_and_map_pci);
> > +#endif
> > pci_bus_add_devices(bus);
> > platform_set_drvdata(pdev, port);
>
> Here it looks like microblaze gets it right. I'm not sure why we still need the
> pci_fixup_irqs() on ARM, but my feeling is that this should be fixed in
> common code.
In arm pci_fixup_irqs is called by pci_common_init_dev (arch/arm/kernel/bios32.c), since this API is removed now, I was calling it separately.
Bharat
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
