On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 07:06:38PM +0200, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
> x86 and ia64 are the only arches that implement pcibios_{add|remove}_bus hooks
> and implement them in the same way. Moreover ARM64 is going to do the same.
> So it seems that acpi_pci_{add|remove}_bus is generic enough to be default
> option for pcibios_{add|remove}_bus hooks. Also, it is always safe to run
> acpi_pci_{add|remove}_bus as they have empty stubs for !ACPI case and
> return if ACPI has been switched off in run time.
>
> After all we can remove x86 and ia64 pcibios_{add|remove}_bus
> implementation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tomasz Nowicki <tn@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxxx>
> Tested-by: Duc Dang <dhdang@xxxxxxx>
> Tested-by: Dongdong Liu <liudongdong3@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Tested-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Tested-by: Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Tested-by: Sinan Kaya <okaya@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/ia64/pci/pci.c | 10 ----------
> arch/x86/pci/common.c | 10 ----------
> drivers/pci/probe.c | 3 +++
> 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/ia64/pci/pci.c b/arch/ia64/pci/pci.c
> index 978d6af..be4c9ef 100644
> --- a/arch/ia64/pci/pci.c
> +++ b/arch/ia64/pci/pci.c
> @@ -358,16 +358,6 @@ void pcibios_fixup_bus(struct pci_bus *b)
> platform_pci_fixup_bus(b);
> }
>
> -void pcibios_add_bus(struct pci_bus *bus)
> -{
> - acpi_pci_add_bus(bus);
> -}
> -
> -void pcibios_remove_bus(struct pci_bus *bus)
> -{
> - acpi_pci_remove_bus(bus);
> -}
> -
> void pcibios_set_master (struct pci_dev *dev)
> {
> /* No special bus mastering setup handling */
> diff --git a/arch/x86/pci/common.c b/arch/x86/pci/common.c
> index 381a43c..7763a84 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/pci/common.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/pci/common.c
> @@ -170,16 +170,6 @@ void pcibios_fixup_bus(struct pci_bus *b)
> pcibios_fixup_device_resources(dev);
> }
>
> -void pcibios_add_bus(struct pci_bus *bus)
> -{
> - acpi_pci_add_bus(bus);
> -}
> -
> -void pcibios_remove_bus(struct pci_bus *bus)
> -{
> - acpi_pci_remove_bus(bus);
> -}
> -
> /*
> * Only use DMI information to set this if nothing was passed
> * on the kernel command line (which was parsed earlier).
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/probe.c b/drivers/pci/probe.c
> index 8087297..ef569e8 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/probe.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/probe.c
> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
> #include <linux/slab.h>
> #include <linux/module.h>
> #include <linux/cpumask.h>
> +#include <linux/pci-acpi.h>
> #include <linux/pci-aspm.h>
> #include <linux/aer.h>
> #include <linux/acpi.h>
> @@ -2101,10 +2102,12 @@ int __weak pcibios_root_bridge_prepare(struct pci_host_bridge *bridge)
>
> void __weak pcibios_add_bus(struct pci_bus *bus)
> {
> + acpi_pci_add_bus(bus);
> }
>
> void __weak pcibios_remove_bus(struct pci_bus *bus)
> {
> + acpi_pci_remove_bus(bus);
> }
Is this buying us something more than just getting rid of these
pcibios functions in the arches? The arch-specific pcibios methods
by themselves don't seem too onerous, and I don't really want to add
#includes and calls to every firmware interface under the sun.
I admit it's a net removal of 17 lines, but I'm not sure it's a net
reduction in complexity for the reader, who now has to remember that
this ACPI stuff is a no-op on most arches.
As a tangent, some of the stuff in acpi_pci_add_bus() really belongs
elsewhere anyway. For example, the _DSM stuff should probably be in
acpi_pci_root_create() since it's a one-per-host bridge kind of thing.
> struct pci_bus *pci_create_root_bus(struct device *parent, int bus,
> --
> 1.9.1
>
--
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
