On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 03:25:50PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 11:30:52AM +0100, Liviu Dudau wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 09:56:32AM +0100, Wei Yang wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 04:49:59PM +0100, Liviu Dudau wrote:
> > > >On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 03:58:04PM +0100, Wei Yang wrote:
> > > >> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 05:25:15PM +0100, Liviu Dudau wrote:
> > > >> > int __weak pcibios_add_device(struct pci_dev *dev)
> > > >> > {
> > > >> >+ dev->irq = of_irq_parse_and_map_pci(dev, 0, 0);
> > > >> >+
> > > >> > return 0;
> > > >> > }
> > > >>
> > > >> For this, my suggestion is to add arch dependent function to setup the irq
> > > >> line for pci devices. I can't find an obvious reason this won't work on other
> > > >> archs, but maybe this will hurt some of them?
> > > >
> > > >I'm not sure I understand your point. Architectures that support OF will obviously
> > > >benefit from this common approach, and for the other ones the function is empty
> > > >so it will not change existing behaviour. If you are suggesting that I should
> > > >create a new API that each architecture could go and implement for setting up the
> > > >IRQ line then I would agree that it would be nice to have that, but the question
> > > >is how many architectures are outside OF that need this?
> > >
> > > My suggestion is to define the pcibios_add_device() for arm arch, like the one
> > > in arch/powerpc/kernel/pci-common.c. If my understanding is correct, this
> > > patch set address the pci bus setup mostly on arm arch.
> >
> > And also arm64 at the least.
> ...
> > Well, it will become necessary as old code gets dismantled and converted towards
> > this patchset. To give you an example that I'm familiar with, for arch/arm the
> > host bridge drivers have moved into drivers/pci/host, but they still depend/use
> > the bios32 infrastructure that takes care of setting up the irq. When they switch
> > to my version they would have to go and debug the "irq not being assigned" issue
> > and it is quite likely that some of the people doing the conversion will complain
> > about my code rather than understanding the issue. What I'm trying to do is to
> > make switching to my patchset as painless as possible, with a cleanup to remove
> > redundant operations coming after the switchover.
>
> While the goal is fine, until we see a common pattern for what needs to
> go into pcibios_add_device() I think we should have an arm64-specific
> implementation (and probably an arm32 specific one as well). I can see
> powerpc uses it for setting the DMA ops. Would we have a similar need on
> arm64 to choose between coherent and non-coherent dma_ops?
At this point I would like to hear more from people doing the conversion of
the drivers. I cannot answer fully for all arm or arm64 drivers.
>
> Also at some point we'll get ACPI support, so I'm not sure what we do
> with assigning the dev->irq here but definitely of_* functions won't
> work.
Yes, maybe adding a check if the IRQ has not been assigned already?
I have no idea what the order will be between ACPI ops and of_* ones.
Best regards,
Liviu
>
> --
> Catalin
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
-------------------
.oooO
( )
\ ( Oooo.
\_) ( )
) /
(_/
One small step
for me ...
--
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
