[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAErSpo7C8qzmdp+XgVi2ysXj_NcgvVY7RVfBZ2PHimLzrzANMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 11:02:56 -0600
From: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc: Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@....com>,
linux-pci <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
Tanmay Inamdar <tinamdar@....com>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org>,
Jingoo Han <jg1.han@...sung.com>,
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>,
Suravee Suthikulanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Device Tree ML <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
LAKML <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 6/9] pci: Introduce a domain number for pci_host_bridge.
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 8:11 AM, Catalin Marinas
<catalin.marinas@....com> 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-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