[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9a9d2e00-efb4-2607-a410-43af1d3c97c3@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 04:24:18 -0400
From: Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>
To: Gabriele Paoloni <gabriele.paoloni@...wei.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Cc: Tomasz Nowicki <tn@...ihalf.com>,
"helgaas@...nel.org" <helgaas@...nel.org>,
"arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
"will.deacon@....com" <will.deacon@....com>,
"catalin.marinas@....com" <catalin.marinas@....com>,
"rafael@...nel.org" <rafael@...nel.org>,
"hanjun.guo@...aro.org" <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
"Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com" <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com>,
"okaya@...eaurora.org" <okaya@...eaurora.org>,
"jchandra@...adcom.com" <jchandra@...adcom.com>,
"linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
"dhdang@....com" <dhdang@....com>,
"Liviu.Dudau@....com" <Liviu.Dudau@....com>,
"ddaney@...iumnetworks.com" <ddaney@...iumnetworks.com>,
"jeremy.linton@....com" <jeremy.linton@....com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"robert.richter@...iumnetworks.com"
<robert.richter@...iumnetworks.com>,
"Suravee.Suthikulpanit@....com" <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@....com>,
"msalter@...hat.com" <msalter@...hat.com>,
Wangyijing <wangyijing@...wei.com>,
"mw@...ihalf.com" <mw@...ihalf.com>,
"andrea.gallo@...aro.org" <andrea.gallo@...aro.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 00/11] Support for generic ACPI based PCI host
controller
On 05/20/2016 04:11 AM, Gabriele Paoloni wrote:
> Hi Ard, Jon
Hi Gabriele :)
> In our case (HiSilicon Hip05/Hip06) we are using the Designware IP
> that unfortunately is non-ECAM for the RC config space.
Yea, I know, and I've pinged them already.
> A possible ACPI table solution was discussed already in this thread
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/3/14/722
>
> where <<Name (_CID, "PNP0C02") // Motherboard reserved resource>>
> is used to specify an Host Controller specific resource.
> It looks to me that this can be an approach that can accommodate
> different vendors/scenarios and Bjorn seemed to be quite ok with
> it.
Yeah, pondering that. We'll chat with a few others about it.
> It comes without saying that for future HW releases we all should
> make an effort to deliver fully ECAM compliant controllers.
Right. Like I said, a number of designs have been fixed already.
> What's your view about this approach?
Will followup over the weekend.
Jon.
--
Computer Architect | Sent from my Fedora powered laptop
Powered by blists - more mailing lists