[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170320161933.GD7632@red-moon>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 16:19:33 +0000
From: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc: Liviu Dudau <liviu@...au.co.uk>,
Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@....com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Wenrui Li <wenrui.li@...k-chips.com>,
Gabriele Paoloni <gabriele.paoloni@...wei.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@...k-chips.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Tanmay Inamdar <tinamdar@....com>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
Pratyush Anand <pratyush.anand@...il.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Jon Mason <jonmason@...adcom.com>,
Murali Karicheri <m-karicheri2@...com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Bharat Kumar Gogada <bharat.kumar.gogada@...inx.com>,
Ray Jui <rjui@...adcom.com>,
John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>,
Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Mingkai Hu <mingkai.hu@...escale.com>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>,
Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Stanimir Varbanov <svarbanov@...sol.com>,
Minghuan Lian <minghuan.Lian@...escale.com>,
Zhou Wang <wangzhou1@...ilicon.com>,
Roy Zang <tie-fei.zang@...escale.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/20] PCI: fix pci_remap_iospace() remap attribute
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 05:26:18PM +0100, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 10:43:39AM +0000, Liviu Dudau wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 01:33:21AM +0100, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > a) should we then use a Fixes tag for this patch ?
> >
> > I'm not aware of issues being reported, but Lorenzo might have more info on this.
>
> Lorenzo ? If not what exactly made you discover this ? If it is a fix, and only
> ARM64 is implicated, seems like a worthy change to consider for stable for the
> sake of stable ARM64 kernels. But, that would leave the PCI config space without
> a simple 1 liner fix too -- so maybe its not worth it. Distributions wanting
> to support ARM64 however would like to carry these changes, so some annotations
> such as Fixes should help.
It started with this thread:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2017-January/477353.html
this series is not fixing any current issue I am aware of (but I am not
keen on leaving code as-is either) hence adding a Fixes: tag is problematic.
I would leave stable kernels alone for the time being.
Lorenzo
> > > b) it does not seem clear what the semantics for pgprot_device() or even
> > > pgprot_noncached(). Can you add some ?
> > >
> > > 8b921acfeffdb ("PCI: Add pci_remap_iospace() to map bus I/O resources")
> > >
> > > Also this patch claims archs can override this call alone, as its __weak.
> > > So is the right thing to do to change pci_remap_iospace() to pgprot_noncached()
> > > or is it for archs to add their own pci_remap_iospace()? If so why ? Without
> > > proper semantics defined for these helpers this is all fuzzy.
> >
> > That was the initial intention, to let arches / platforms overwrite the whole
> > pci_remap_iospace(). I guess the reality is that no one needs to overwrite it except
> > for the AArch64 quirk, so probably easier to remove the __weak and fix the attributes for arm64.
>
> Sounds much more reasonable to me.
>
> Luis
Powered by blists - more mailing lists