On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Grant Likely wrote: > On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Michal Simek <monstr@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:monstr@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > > On 12/10/2012 10:41 PM, Grant Likely wrote: > >> drivers/pci/pci-of.c would be good. I'd also accept drivers/of/pci.c > >> which might actually be a good idea in the short term so that it gets > >> appropriate supervision while being generalized before being moved into > >> the pci directory. > > > > Ben: Are you willing to move that ppc code to this location? > > It is probably not good idea that I should do it when I even don't have > > hardware available for testing (Asking someone else). > > You're a clever guy, you are more than capable of crafting the patch, > even if you can't test on hardware. :-) > > I refactored most of the OF support code without having access to most > of the affected hardware. Once I got the changes out there for review > I also asked for spot testing before getting it into linux-next for > even more testing. I've been working on a relatively architecture agnostic PCI host bridge driver and also wanted to avoid duplicating more generic DT parsing code for PCI bindings. I've ended up with a patch which provides an iterator for returning resources based on the the typical 'ranges' binding. This has ended up living in drivers/of/address.c. I originally started out in drivers/of/pci.c and drivers/pci/pci-of.c but found there were good (and static) implementations in drivers/of/address.c which can be reused (e.g. of_bus_pci_get_flags, bus->count_cells). I'm not just ready to post it - but can do before early next week if you can wait. Andrew Murray -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
