Hi
Thanks for reviewing.
On 11 April 2015 at 16:55, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Saturday 11 April 2015 12:17:57 Paul Bolle wrote:
>> Something I didn't spot in my first look at this patch.
>>
>> On Fri, 2015-04-10 at 11:12 +0200, Gabriel FERNANDEZ wrote:
>> > --- a/drivers/pci/host/Kconfig
>> > +++ b/drivers/pci/host/Kconfig
>> >
>> > +config PCI_ST
>> > + bool "ST PCIe controller"
>> > + depends on ARCH_STI || (ARM && COMPILE_TEST)
>> > + select PCIE_DW
>> > + help
>> > + Enable PCIe controller support on ST Socs. This controller is based
>> > + on Designware hardware and therefore the driver re-uses the
>> > + Designware core functions to implement the driver.
>>
>> You can't have ARCH_STI without ARM, so ARM will always be set if this
>> driver is enabled. Correct?
>
> Right, though the ARM dependency could soon be dropped, once the PCIE_DW
> driver can use generic infrastructure in the few places it relies on
> ARM specific code today.
>
>> > --- /dev/null
>> > +++ b/drivers/pci/host/pci-st.c
>>
>> > + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM)) {
>> > + /*
>> > + * We have to hook the abort handler so that we can intercept
>> > + * bus errors when doing config read/write that return UR,
>> > + * which is flagged up as a bus error
>> > + */
>> > + hook_fault_code(16+6, st_pcie_abort_handler, SIGBUS, 0,
>> > + "imprecise external abort");
>> > + }
>>
>> So, unless I'm missing something obvious here, IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM)
>> will always evaluate to 1. Can't that test be dropped?
>
> I would leave it in, as it's quite likely to get reused with ARM64 at some
> point in the future (no, I don't know anything about ST's product plans,
> but everybody seems to be doing this).
>
> Arnd
Yes i agree with that.
Gabriel
--
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
