On 2014/9/25 18:38, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, 25 Sep 2014, Yijing Wang wrote: > >> Introduce weak arch_find_msi_chip() to find the match msi_chip. >> Currently, MSI chip associates pci bus to msi_chip. Because in >> ARM platform, there may be more than one MSI controller in system. >> Associate pci bus to msi_chip help pci device to find the match >> msi_chip and setup MSI/MSI-X irq correctly. But in other platform, >> like in x86. we only need one MSI chip, because all device use >> the same MSI address/data and irq etc. So it's no need to associate >> pci bus to MSI chip, just use a arch function, arch_find_msi_chip() >> to return the MSI chip for simplicity. The default weak >> arch_find_msi_chip() used in ARM platform, find the MSI chip >> by pci bus. > > This is really backwards. On one hand you try to get rid of the weak > arch functions zoo and then you invent new ones for no good > reason. Why can't x86 store the chip in the pci bus? Hi Thomas, I introduced this weak function , because I thought all platforms except arm always have only one msi chip, and I hoped to provide a simplest solution, less code changes. I consider several solutions to associate msi chip and PCI device. In my reply to Thierry in first reply, http://marc.info/?l=linux-pci&m=141169658208255&w=2 Could you give me some advices ? Thanks! Yijing. > > Looking deeper, I'm questioning the whole notion of different > msi_chips. Are this really different MSI controllers with a different > feature set or are this defacto multiple instances of the same > controller which just need a different data set? > > Thanks, > > tglx > > . > -- Thanks! Yijing
