On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 17:09 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Scott Wood <scottwood@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 13:13 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > >> [+cc Ben, Paul, linuxppc-dev] > >> > >> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 04:52:54PM +0800, Minghuan Lian wrote: > >> > The Freescale's Layerscape series processors will use ARM cores. > >> > The LS1's PCIe controllers is the same as T4240's. So it's better > >> > the PCIe controller driver can support PowerPC and ARM > >> > simultaneously. This patch is for this purpose. It derives > >> > the common functions from arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pci.c to > >> > drivers/pci/host/pci-fsl-common.c and leaves the architecture > >> > specific functions which should be implemented in arch related files. > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Minghuan Lian <Minghuan.Lian@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> I cc'd the powerpc maintainers so we can work out which tree this > >> should go through. > >> > >> > --- > >> > change log: > >> > v1-v2: > >> > 1. rename pci.h to pci-common.h > >> > 2. rename pci-fsl.c to pci-fsl-common.c > >> > > >> > Based on upstream master. > >> > Based on the discussion of RFC version here > >> > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/274487/ > >> > > >> > arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pci.c | 521 +----------------- > >> > arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pci.h | 89 ---- > >> > .../fsl_pci.c => drivers/pci/host/pci-fsl-common.c | 591 +-------------------- > >> > .../fsl_pci.h => include/linux/fsl/pci-common.h | 45 +- > >> > >> Is there any way to avoid putting this file in include/linux? I know > >> you want to share it beyond PowerPC, and I know there are similar > >> examples there already, but this is all arch-specific or > >> chipset-specific stuff that seems like it should be in some > >> not-so-public place. It doesn't seem scalable to add an include/linux > >> subdirectory for every chipset that might be shared across > >> architectures. > > > > What specifically is the problem with it, as long as it's properly > > namespaced? > > Well, as I said above, it doesn't seem scalable, I'm not sure what scaling problems you're picturing, assuming proper namespacing and organization within include/linux/. > and it doesn't seem to be the common existing practice. > > Possibly this is just because sharing chipsets across arches isn't very common yet. > > I hadn't noticed that include/linux/fsl exists already; I thought you > were adding it. Given that it *does* exist already, I guess I'm OK > with putting more stuff in it. I see other existing practice as well. Besides plenty of "include/linux/fsl*" that ought to be moved to "include/linux/fsl/", I see things like include/linux/amba/, include/linux/scx200*, include/linux/clksrc-dbx500-prcmu.h, include/linux/com202020.h, etc. These are just a few random examples out of many. > So I'll apply these given an ack from the powerpc folks. ACK this patch. The second one I'd like to see broken up into digestible chunks so I can better review it. -Scott -- 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
