On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 15:33 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > @@ -242,8 +264,10 @@ > > ranges = <0x02000000 0x00000000 0x80000000 0x00000110 0x80000000 0x0 0x80000000 > > 0x01000000 0x0 0x0 0x00000140 0x0 0x0 0x00010000>; > > > > - /* Inbound starting at 0 to memsize filled in by zImage */ > > - dma-ranges = <0x42000000 0x0 0x0 0x0 0x0 0x0 0x0>; > > + /* Inbound starting at 0x0 to 0x40000000000. In order to use MSI > > + * PCI devices must be able to write to the HSTA module. > > + */ > > + dma-ranges = <0x42000000 0x0 0x0 0x0 0x0 0x400 0x0>; Should we (provided it's possible in HW) create two ranges instead ? One covering RAM and one covering MSIs ? To avoid stray DMAs whacking random HW registers in the chip ... > > /* This drives busses 0 to 0xf */ > > bus-range = <0x0 0xf>; > > Ah, I first only saw the line you are removing and was about > to suggest what you do anyway. Great! > > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/ppc4xx_pci.c b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/ppc4xx_pci.c > > index 54ec1d5..7cc3acc 100644 > > --- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/ppc4xx_pci.c > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/ppc4xx_pci.c > > @@ -176,8 +176,12 @@ static int __init ppc4xx_parse_dma_ranges(struct pci_controller *hose, > > return -ENXIO; > > } > > > > - /* Check that we are fully contained within 32 bits space */ > > - if (res->end > 0xffffffff) { > > + /* Check that we are fully contained within 32 bits space if we are not > > + * running on a 460sx or 476fpe which have 64 bit bus addresses. > > + */ > > + if (res->end > 0xffffffff && > > + !(of_device_is_compatible(hose->dn, "ibm,plb-pciex-460sx") > > + || of_device_is_compatible(hose->dn, "ibm,plb-pciex-476fpe"))) { > > printk(KERN_ERR "%s: dma-ranges outside of 32 bits space\n", > > hose->dn->full_name); > > return -ENXIO; > > A more general question for BenH: Apparently this PCI implementation is > getting reused on arm64 for APM X-Gene. Do you see any value in trying to > share host controller drivers like this one across powerpc and arm64? I would start duplicating, and see how much common code remains... Then eventually merge. > It's possible we are going to see the same situation with fsl_pci in the > future, if arm and powerpc qoriq chips use the same peripherals. My > plan for arm64 right now is to make PCI work without any code in arch/, > just using new helper functions in drivers/pci and sticking the host > drivers into drivers/pci/host as we started doing for arm32, but it > can require significant work to make those drivers compatible with > the powerpc pci-common.c. powerpc pci-common.c is shrinking :-) At least the address remapping is all in the core now, we could move more over I suppose... Cheers, Ben. > Arnd > -- > 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 -- 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