[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190130172855.GA2962@infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2019 09:28:55 -0800
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Thomas Bogendoerfer <tbogendoerfer@...e.de>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
James Hogan <jhogan@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
Paul Burton <paul.burton@...s.com>,
Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] MIPS: SGI-IP27: use generic PCI driver
On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 06:25:20PM +0100, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
>
> and it's already there:-) Each struct device has a field numa_node and pci_bus has
> contains a struct device. arm64 is already using it only not so nice part is the
> usage of pcibios_root_bridge_prepare() to set the numa_node for the root bus.
Oh, great. Maybe we can then just use that field for mips for now
and gradually move all architectures over.
> > Or add a add_dev callback, similar to what I did for a previous series
> > that we didn't end up needing after all:
> >
> > http://git.infradead.org/users/hch/misc.git/commitdiff/06d9b4fc7deed336edc1292fe2e661729e98ec39
>
> that's exactly what I'm looking for. Should I add the patch for my patchset or
> are you going to submit it after having a use case ?
Feel free to pick it up. For the dma addressing limitations we
decided that exposing it through a DT property is the right way, so
that series isn't going anywhere.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists