Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> In order to introduce PCI power-sequencing, we need to create platform
> devices for child nodes of the port node. They will get matched against
> the pwrseq drivers (if one exists) and then the actual PCI device will
> reuse the node once it's detected on the bus.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@xxxxxxxxxx>
[..]
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/remove.c b/drivers/pci/remove.c
> index d749ea8250d6..77be0630b7b3 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/remove.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/remove.c
> @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> #include <linux/pci.h>
> #include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/of_platform.h>
> #include "pci.h"
>
> static void pci_free_resources(struct pci_dev *dev)
> @@ -18,11 +19,11 @@ static void pci_stop_dev(struct pci_dev *dev)
> pci_pme_active(dev, false);
>
> if (pci_dev_is_added(dev)) {
> -
> device_release_driver(&dev->dev);
> pci_proc_detach_device(dev);
> pci_remove_sysfs_dev_files(dev);
> of_pci_remove_node(dev);
> + of_platform_depopulate(&dev->dev);
>
> pci_dev_assign_added(dev, false);
Why is pci_stop_dev() not in strict reverse order of
pci_bus_add_device()? I see that pci_dev_assign_added() was already not
in reverse "add" order before your change, but I otherwise would have
expected of_platform_depopulate() before of_pci_remove_node() (assumed
paired with of_pci_make_dev_node()).
