[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <EE11001F9E5DDD47B7634E2F8A612F2E1F8815C8@lhreml507-mbx>
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 11:12:09 +0000
From: Gabriele Paoloni <gabriele.paoloni@...wei.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
CC: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Tomasz Nowicki <tn@...ihalf.com>,
David Daney <ddaney@...iumnetworks.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
"Rafael Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org>,
Jayachandran C <jchandra@...adcom.com>,
"Christopher Covington" <cov@...eaurora.org>,
Duc Dang <dhdang@....com>,
Robert Richter <robert.richter@...iumnetworks.com>,
Marcin Wojtas <mw@...ihalf.com>,
"Liviu Dudau" <Liviu.Dudau@....com>,
Wangyijing <wangyijing@...wei.com>,
Mark Salter <msalter@...hat.com>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linaro ACPI Mailman List <linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org>,
Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>,
Andrea Gallo <andrea.gallo@...aro.org>,
Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@....com>,
"liudongdong (C)" <liudongdong3@...wei.com>,
Jeff Hugo <jhugo@...eaurora.org>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Subject: RE: [PATCH V6 3/5] PCI: thunder-pem: Allow to probe PEM-specific
register range for ACPI case
Hi Bjorn
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bjorn Helgaas [mailto:helgaas@...nel.org]
> Sent: 21 September 2016 19:59
> To: Gabriele Paoloni
> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel; Tomasz Nowicki; David Daney; Will Deacon; Catalin
> Marinas; Rafael Wysocki; Lorenzo Pieralisi; Arnd Bergmann; Hanjun Guo;
> Sinan Kaya; Jayachandran C; Christopher Covington; Duc Dang; Robert
> Richter; Marcin Wojtas; Liviu Dudau; Wangyijing; Mark Salter; linux-
> pci@...r.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org; Linaro ACPI
> Mailman List; Jon Masters; Andrea Gallo; Jeremy Linton; liudongdong
> (C); Jeff Hugo; linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org; linux-
> kernel@...r.kernel.org; Rafael J. Wysocki
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V6 3/5] PCI: thunder-pem: Allow to probe PEM-
> specific register range for ACPI case
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 02:10:55PM +0000, Gabriele Paoloni wrote:
> > Hi Bjorn
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >
> > >
> > > If future hardware is completely ECAM-compliant and we don't need
> any
> > > more MCFG quirks, that would be great.
> > >
> > > But we'll still need to describe that memory-mapped config space
> > > somewhere. If that's done with PNP0C02 or similar devices (as is
> done
> > > on my x86 laptop), we'd be all set.
> > >
> > > If we need to work around firmware in the field that doesn't do
> that,
> > > one possibility is a PNP quirk along the lines of
> > > quirk_amd_mmconfig_area().
> >
> > So, if my understanding is correct, for platforms that have not been
> > shipped yet you propose to use PNP0C02 in the ACPI table in order to
> > declare a motherboard reserved resource whereas for shipped platforms
> > you propose to have a quirk along pnp_fixups in order to track the
> > resource usage even if values are hardcoded...correct?
>
> Yes. I'm open to alternate proposals, but x86 uses PNP0C02, and
> following existing practice seems reasonable.
>
> > Before Tomasz came up with this patchset we had a call between the
> vendors
> > involved in this PCI quirks saga and other guys from Linaro and ARM.
> >
> > Lorenzo summarized the outcome as in the following link
> > http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1606.2/03344.html
> >
> > Since this quirks mechanism has been discussed for quite a long time
> now
> > IMHO it would be good to have a last call including also you (Bjorn)
> so
> > that we can all agree on what to do and we avoid changing our drivers
> again
> > and again...
>
> I think we're converging pretty fast. As far as I'm concerned, the
> v6 ECAM quirks implementation is perfect. The only remaining issue is
> reporting the ECAM resources, and I haven't seen objections to using
> PNP0C02 + PNP quirks for broken firmware.
>
> There is the question of how or whether to associate a PNP0A03 PCI
> bridge with resources from a different PNP0C02 device, but that's not
> super important. If the hard-coded resources appear both in a quirk
> and in the PCI bridge driver, it's ugly but not the end of the world.
> We've still achieved the objective of avoiding landmines in the
> address space.
Ok got it many thanks
Gab
>
> Bjorn
Powered by blists - more mailing lists