On 2/5/2016 2:39 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 05 February 2016 10:44:29 Joao Pinto wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 2/4/2016 11:43 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >>>> What do you think? >>> >>> I don't think the "dw" part is relevant (none of the other >>> DesignWare-based drivers includes it in the driver or file name). >>> >>> How do people typically refer to this board? >>> >>> I really like "synopsys" because it fits the pattern of being >>> recognizable and pronounceable like "altera", "designware", "qcom", >>> "keystone", "layerscape", "tegra", etc. But I can't tell whether it's >>> too generic. >>> >>> "ipk" or "haps" would be fine with me. I think it's OK if it doesn't >>> cover 100% of the possible systems. >> >> I think we should follow the iproc example: pcie-iproc-platform.c >> In this case we would have pcie-designware-platform.c >> I think this would be the best name because the driver is a non soc specific >> designware platform driver. >> >> Arnd and Bjorn agree on this name? > > Sorry, I did not realize that your submission was for the generic dw-pcie > implementation rather than a particular product integrating it. > It is a driver that is useful for PCIe RC prototyping and to be a reference platform driver for DesignWare PCIe RC, I don't know if merging some of the driver's code into pcie-designware is really necessary depends on the usefulness of it. I would suggest that bigger step to be done in a 2nd stage since I will be around to maintain what's necessary. Agree? I made a patch that is applicable to Bjorn's host/pcie-synopsys that tries to match your suggestions and Bjorn's. Could you please comment check it? > I think in this case, we should do this completely differently: > > How about putting all the new code into drivers/pci/host/pcie-designware.c > as functions that can be used by the other drivers in absence of a chip > specific handler? > > Instead of providing a new instance of struct pcie_host_ops, maybe add > it as a default implementation in dw_pcie_link_up() and dw_pcie_host_init() > for drivers that don't provide their own. "hisi_pcie_host_ops" currently > provides no host_init() callback function, so you will have to change > the hisi frontend to a provide nop-function. > > For all other drivers, check if they can be changed to use your generic > implementation and remove their private callbacks if possible. > > I think the MSI implementation should be split out into a separate file > though, as not everyone uses this. > > Arnd > Joao -- 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
