[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3552943.lb56sJA8nL@wuerfel>
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2016 15:25:46 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>,
Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
Scott Branden <sbranden@...adcom.com>,
Jon Mason <jonmason@...adcom.com>,
Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
Pratyush Anand <pratyush.anand@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rfi@...ts.rocketboards.org,
linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Tanmay Inamdar <tinamdar@....com>, Ray Jui <rjui@...adcom.com>,
linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, Ley Foon Tan <lftan@...era.com>,
Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
Sören Brinkmann <soren.brinkmann@...inx.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/25] PCI: Request host bridge window resources
On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 8:11:05 AM CEST Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >
> > What do you think is the correct behavior here, should the driver only
> > request the PIO range with parent=ioport_resource, or should it also
> > request the MMIO window for the I/O ports with parent=iomem_resource?
> > In the latter case, any idea how that can be generalized?
>
> I think it should request both because I think iomem_resource should
> contain everything in the memory map. This would be required if we ever
> did any significant reassignment of top-level devices, e.g., ACPI devices.
Ok. Should we try to pass the mmio resource for the I/O window to
the devm_request_pci_bus_resources() function along with the other
arguments then?
As far as I can tell, it should not go into the resource list
because it is not something the PCI core code should access the
way it handles the other resources.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists