On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 06:56:40PM +0800, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 05:56:47PM +0900, Jingoo Han wrote: > [...] > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig > > index 855d4a7..9ef1c95 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/Kconfig > > @@ -93,6 +93,7 @@ config SOC_EXYNOS5440 > > default y > > depends on ARCH_EXYNOS5 > > select ARCH_HAS_OPP > > + select ARCH_SUPPORTS_MSI > > This symbol goes away in Thomas Petazzoni's MSI patch series which is > targetted at 3.12, so I don't think you should add that here. > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_MSI > > +static void exynos_pcie_clear_irq_level(struct pcie_port *pp) > > +{ > > + u32 val; > > + struct exynos_pcie *exynos_pcie = to_exynos_pcie(pp); > > + void __iomem *elbi_base = exynos_pcie->elbi_base; > > + > > + val = readl(elbi_base + PCIE_IRQ_LEVEL); > > + writel(val, elbi_base + PCIE_IRQ_LEVEL); > > + return; > > +} > > I'm a little confused by this: the above code seems to access the PCIe > controller registers to clear an interrupt, but you pass in a PCIe > port... > One struct pcie_port is associated with one controller and it has been assumed that there is only one root port per controller. [...] > > +void dw_pcie_msi_init(struct pcie_port *pp) > > +{ > > + /* program the msi_data */ > > + dw_pcie_wr_own_conf(pp, PCIE_MSI_ADDR_LO, 4, > > + __virt_to_phys((u32)(&msi_data))); > > That's slightly odd. You convert the virtual address of a local variable > (local to the file) to a physical address and program that into a > register. I assume that it works since you've probably tested this, but > I wonder if it's safe to do this. Perhaps a better way would be to > allocate a single free page (__get_free_pages(GFP_KERNEL, 0)) and write > the physical address of that into the register instead. > also msi_data must be different for different controller. Something like &msi_data[pp->port]. [...] > > +void arch_teardown_msi_irq(unsigned int irq) > > +{ > > + clear_irq(irq); > > +} > > And we've reworked this largely so that drivers no longer provide arch_* > functions because that prevents multi-platform support. So I think you > need to port this to the new msi_chip infrastructure that's being > introduced in 3.12. Yes, its needed. Regards Pratyush > > Thierry -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html