On Fri, Sep 08, 2023 at 01:40:13PM +0000, D M, Sharath Kumar wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> > > On Fri, Sep 08, 2023 at 09:09:34AM +0000, D M, Sharath Kumar wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> ... > > > > > > > + int (*ep_read_cfg)(struct altera_pcie *pcie, u8 busno, > > > > > + unsigned int devfn, int where, int size, u32 *value); > > > > > + int (*ep_write_cfg)(struct altera_pcie *pcie, u8 busno, > > > > > + unsigned int devfn, int where, int size, u32 value); > > > > > > > > "ep_read_cfg" isn't the ideal name because it suggests "endpoint", > > > > but it may be either an endpoint or a switch upstream port. The > > > > rockchip driver uses "other", which isn't super descriptive either but > > might be better. > > > > > > > Ok will change to "nonrp_read_cfg" ? > > > > I think the important point is not whether it's a Root Port or not, but whether > > it's on the root *bus* or not. In other words, I think the driver has to > > determine whether to generate a Type 0 (targeting something on the root > > bus) or a Type 1 (targeting something below a > > bridge) config transaction (see PCI-to-PCI Bridge spec r1.2, sec 3.1.2.1). > > > > There can be non-Root Ports on the root bus, so "nonrp" doesn't seem quite > > right. "Other" would be OK, since that's already used by other drivers. > > Maybe "type0" and "type1" would be better and would fit well with the > > root_bus_nr check you use to distinguish them? > > > Situation is > Root port configuration space - memory mapped > Non root port configuration space - indirect access/proprietary access > Type 0 for devices directly connected to root port > Type 1 for others "mm", "ind"?
