On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 03:11:16PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 11:36:10PM +0100, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > Most of the rest of the v7 discussion was about "Introduce a domain
> > number for pci_host_bridge." I think we should add arm64 using the
> > existing pci_scan_root_bus() and keep the domain number in the arm64
> > sysdata structure like every other arch does. Isn't that feasible?
> > We can worry about domain unification later.
>
> I think that's what we were trying to avoid, adding an arm64-specific
> pci_sys_data structure (and arm64-specific API). IIUC, avoiding this
> would allow the host controller drivers to use the sysdata pointer for
> their own private data structures.
>
> Also since you can specify the domain number via DT (and in Liviu's
> v8 patches read by of_create_pci_host_bridge), I think it would make
> sense to have it stored in some generic data structures (e.g.
> pci_host_bridge) rather than in an arm64 private sysdata.
>
> (Liviu is thinking of an alternative API but maybe he could briefly
> describe it here before posting a new series)
>
> --
> Catalin
My plan is to keep the domain number in the pci_host_bridge and split
the creation of the pci_host_bridge out of the pci_create_root_bus().
The new function (tentatively called pci_create_new_root_bus()) will
no longer call pci_alloc_host_bridge() but will accept it as a
parameter, allowing one to be able to set the domain_nr ahead of the
root bus creation.
Best regards,
Liviu
--
====================
| 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
