[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <548F338F.9030203@broadcom.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 11:16:31 -0800
From: Ray Jui <rjui@...adcom.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
"Ian Campbell" <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
Christian Daudt <bcm@...thebug.org>,
Matt Porter <mporter@...aro.org>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@...ke-m.de>,
Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>,
Scott Branden <sbranden@...adcom.com>,
<linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] PCI: iproc: Add Broadcom iProc PCIe driver
On 12/12/2014 9:21 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday 12 December 2014 09:08:48 Ray Jui wrote:
>>
>> On 12/12/2014 4:29 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> Doesn't Hauke's driver depends on BCMA? In that case, how does it work
>> on the SoCs that do not have the IP block to support BCMA?
>
> I hadn't realized that there are some SoCs that are not BCMA based.
> As the host controller implementation is closely related, we will
> have to come up with some solution.
>
I agree with you that we should have a common PCIe host driver which
supports all iProc SoCs, BCM4708, BCM5301X, and some other similar SoCs.
> One way to solve this would be by turning the driver into a library
> the same way as the pcie-dw driver, and have separate front-ends
> for it for platform_device and bcma_device.
>
I'm fine with this solution, i.e., to introduce a common pcie-iproc core
driver (just like pcie-designware) and have different front-ends
depending on the device/bus type. If we end up deciding to go with this
solution, I need to discuss with Hauke to come up with a plan to
collaborate.
But before we choose to go with that route, may I ask, what is the
purpose of tying a PCIe host driver to BCMA? What benefit does BCMA give
us? If we have a generic platform based PCIe driver that can work on all
iProc SoCs + BCM4708 and BCM5301X with all HW specific configurations
taken care of by device tree, why do we still need to use BCMA?
I thought all a BCMA device here does is to auto-instantiate based on
some register readings?
--
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