[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <147496989.L43SVC7xRY@wuerfel>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 13:25:42 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: okaya@...eaurora.org
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
timur@...eaurora.org, cov@...eaurora.org, jcm@...hat.com,
eric.auger@...aro.org, mark.rutland@....com,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
Baptiste Reynal <b.reynal@...tualopensystems.com>,
vikrams@...eaurora.org, marc.zyngier@....com,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
vinod.koul@...el.com, Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
agross@...eaurora.org, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
shankerd@...eaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/3] vfio, platform: add support for ACPI while detecting the reset driver
On Tuesday 29 March 2016 06:59:15 okaya@...eaurora.org wrote:
> On 2016-03-29 05:25, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Monday 28 March 2016 09:35:22 Sinan Kaya wrote:
> >> The code is using the compatible DT string to associate a reset driver
> >> with
> >> the actual device itself. The compatible string does not exist on ACPI
> >> based systems. HID is the unique identifier for a device driver
> >> instead.
> >> The change allows a driver to register with DT compatible string or
> >> ACPI
> >> HID and then match the object with one of these conditions.
> >>
> >> Rules for loading the reset driver are as follow:
> >> - ACPI HID needs match for ACPI systems
> >> - DT compat needs to match for OF systems
> >>
> >> Tested-by: Eric Auger <eric.auger@...aro.org> (device tree only)
> >> Tested-by: Shanker Donthineni <shankerd@...eaurora.org> (ACPI only)
> >> Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org>
> >>
> >
> >
> > This really feels wrong for two reasons:
> >
> > * device assignment of non-PCI devices is really special and doesn't
> > seem to make sense on general purpose servers that would be the
> > target
> > for ACPI normally
>
>
> Why is it special? Acpi is not equal to pci. Platform devices are first
> class devices too. Especially, _cls was introduced for this reason.
It still feels like a hack. The normal design for a server is to have
all internal devices show up on the PCI host bridge, next to the PCIe
ports, to have a simple way to manage any device, both internal and
off-chip. Putting a device on random MMIO registers outside of the
discoverable buses and have the firmware work around the lack of
discoverability will always be inferior.
> >
> > * If there is indeed a requirement for ACPI to handle something like
> > this,
> > it should be part of the ACPI spec, with a well-defined method of
> > handling
> > reset, rather than having to add a device specific hack for each
> > device separately.
> >
>
> I see. Normally, this is done by calling _rst method. AFAIK, Linux
> doesn’t support _rst. I can check its presence and call it if it is
> there.
Yes, that sounds reasonable: In patch 2 where you check for the
presence of the reset method, just keep the existing logic for
DT based systems, and use _rst on ACPI based systems instead,
then you can drop both patches 1 and 3.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists