On Saturday 16 April 2016 12:50:13 Jayachandran C wrote: > > > > I still think it would be better to keep the loadable PCI host drivers > > separate from the ACPI PCI infrastructure. There are a number of > > simplifications that we want to do to the DT based drivers in the long > > run, so it's better if that code is not shared at this level. Abstracting > > out the ECAM code is fine, but at that point you should be able to just > > call it from the ACPI layer. > > The issue is not with this patch (in my opinion). This patch is just > re-arranging how thunder specific data is maintained. Earlier it was > a container_of gen_pci, now it is ->priv of pci_config_window. > > I can see the issue in patches 12 and 13 of this patchset which adds > ACPI fixups into the thunder OF driver. Right, I commented on this one, because it seems to rearrange the code in order to do the later one. > The simple approach when doing modular PCI drivers would be to make > pci-thunder-*.c like pci-host-common.c, to be compiled in if configured. > The fie will contain all the Thunder quirks and can export > pci_thunder_ecam_ops. I would argue that we should not export anything from drivers/pci/host, those should really be standalone drivers that do not interact with other subsystems. How much code would you need to duplicate from thunder-ecam to have the same functionality available in ACPI? My expectation is that it's not really that much more compared to the code you need for sharing a single implementation, but you get a lower complexity here, which makes it easier to understand and to rework. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
