On 05/03/18 18:39, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 03:48:32PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote:
Unfortunately for us, fsl-mc is conceptually rather like PCI in that it's
software-discoverable and the only thing described in DT is the bus "host",
thus we need the same sort of thing as for PCI to map from the child
devices back to the bus root in order to find the appropriate firmware
node. Worse than PCI, though, we wouldn't even have the option of
describing child devices statically in firmware at all, since it's actually
one of these runtime-configurable "build your own network accelerator"
hardware pools where userspace gets to create and destroy "devices" as it
likes.
I really hate the PCI special case just as much. Maybe we just
need a dma_configure method on the bus, and move PCI as well as fsl-mc
to it.
Hmm, on reflection, 100% ack to that idea. It would neatly supersede
bus->force_dma *and* mean that we don't have to effectively pull pci.h
into everything, which I've never liked. In hindsight dma_configure()
does feel like it's grown into this odd choke point where we munge
everything in just for it to awkwardly unpick things again.
Robin.
--
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
