[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <57503626.9050208@semihalf.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 15:35:34 +0200
From: Tomasz Nowicki <tn@...ihalf.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: rafael@...nel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, will.deacon@....com,
okaya@...eaurora.org, wangyijing@...wei.com,
andrea.gallo@...aro.org, Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com,
linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org, ddaney@...iumnetworks.com,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, robert.richter@...iumnetworks.com,
helgaas@...nel.org, liudongdong3@...wei.com,
catalin.marinas@....com, Liviu.Dudau@....com, jcm@...hat.com,
msalter@...hat.com, cov@...eaurora.org, mw@...ihalf.com,
jchandra@...adcom.com, dhdang@....com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jeremy.linton@....com,
hanjun.guo@...aro.org, Suravee.Suthikulpanit@....com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] pci, acpi: Match PCI config space accessors
against platfrom specific ECAM quirks.
On 02.06.2016 14:32, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday, June 2, 2016 2:07:43 PM CEST Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
>> On 02.06.2016 13:42, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>> On Thursday, June 2, 2016 10:41:01 AM CEST Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
>>>> +struct pci_ecam_ops *pci_mcfg_get_ops(struct acpi_pci_root *root)
>>>> +{
>>>> + int bus_num = root->secondary.start;
>>>> + int domain = root->segment;
>>>> + struct pci_cfg_fixup *f;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (!mcfg_table)
>>>> + return &pci_generic_ecam_ops;
>>>> +
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * Match against platform specific quirks and return corresponding
>>>> + * CAM ops.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * First match against PCI topology <domain:bus> then use OEM ID and
>>>> + * OEM revision from MCFG table standard header.
>>>> + */
>>>> + for (f = __start_acpi_mcfg_fixups; f < __end_acpi_mcfg_fixups; f++) {
>>>> + if ((f->domain == domain || f->domain == PCI_MCFG_DOMAIN_ANY) &&
>>>> + (f->bus_num == bus_num || f->bus_num == PCI_MCFG_BUS_ANY) &&
>>>> + (!strncmp(f->oem_id, mcfg_table->header.oem_id,
>>>> + ACPI_OEM_ID_SIZE)) &&
>>>> + (f->oem_revision == mcfg_table->header.oem_revision))
>>>> + return f->ops;
>>>> + }
>>>> + /* No quirks, use ECAM */
>>>> + return &pci_generic_ecam_ops;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> int pci_mcfg_lookup(struct acpi_pci_root *root)
>>>
>>> Can you explain the use of pci_ecam_ops instead of pci_ops here?
>>>
>>
>> I wanted to get associated bus_shift and use it to setup configuration
>> region properly before calling pci_ecam_create. Please see next patch.
>>
>
> I see. It feels really odd to do it this way though, since having a
> nonstandard bus_shift essentially means not using anything resembling
> ECAM to start with.
>
> I realize that a lot of the host bridges are not ECAM, but because
> of this, it would be more logical to have their own pci_ops instead
> of pci_ecam_ops.
Well, we have bus_shift there to express bus shift differentiation. So I
would say we should change just structure name to prevent misunderstanding.
Thanks,
Tomasz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists