On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 8:11 AM, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> 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. It would definitely be nice to keep the domain in a generic data structure rather than an arm64-specific one. But every other arch keeps it in an arch-specific structure today, and I think following that existing pattern is the quickest way forward. But you mentioned arm64-specific API, too. What do you have in mind there? I know there will be arm64 implementations of various pcibios_*() functions (just like for every other arch), but it sounds like there might be something else? 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
