On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 03:30:35PM +0100, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 4:45 AM, Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Semantic question: what is the perceived difference between a pci_controller
> > and a pci_host_bridge? Are they just historical naming artifacts of the
> > same concept? (person A deciding to do a cleanup of the code and picks a
> > new name in order not to upset the old APIs)
>
> pci_controller is a typical name for the arch-dependent PCI host
> bridge structure. Some arches use different names, e.g.,
> pci_sys_data, pci_hba_data, pci_channel, etc.
>
> When I added support in the PCI core for host bridge address
> translation, e.g., ACPI _TRA, I named the core structure
> pci_host_bridge.
>
> Some of the stuff in pci_controller and similar arch-dependent
> structures could probably be moved into pci_host_bridge, given
> appropriate PCI core interfaces to supply the information (or maybe
> pcibios_*() functions the core could use to retrieve it). But I doubt
> we could completely remove the arch-dependent structures.
How about this as a battle plan:
- create a "generic pci_controller struct" (actual name to be picked later)
that parses the DT for ranges and creates the relevant
pci_host_bridge_windows, then calls pci_scan_root_bus()
- provide some weak function definitions that arch-dependent code
can override for the cases where the "generic pci_controller struct"
version does not fit the bill.
Best regards,
Liviu
>
> Bjorn
> --
> 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
>
--
====================
| I would like to |
| fix the world, |
| but they're not |
| giving me the |
\ source code! /
---------------
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
--
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
