[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201403201326.02377.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 13:26:02 +0100
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@....com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
"linux-pci" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
"linaro-kernel" <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
LAKML <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Tanmay Inamdar <tinamdar@....com>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/3] arm64: Add architecture support for PCI
On Thursday 20 March 2014, Liviu Dudau wrote:
> > I don't even understand why you want to create a generic pci_address_to_pio
> > implementation, when we don't need that for arm64 at all. Unless I'm
> > missing something important, that function is only called in case of
> > PCI_PROBE_DEVTREE with pci_of_scan on PowerPC. I don't expect any
> > architecture to do the same thing, and the only other architecture that
> > needs something like it (sparc) has a different implementation.
>
> Because in my [v7 2/6]* patch for the generic host bridge support I start
> using pci_address_to_pio to fix the conversion of PCI ranges to resources.
> That requires an arm64 (or more correctly, an arch with memory mapped IO
> specific) version of pci_address_to_pio().
Yes, but why do you use it there?
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists