[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7495dcab-f293-4b2a-4740-2249f61351f7@huawei.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 10:02:52 +0100
From: John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
CC: <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>, <arnd@...db.de>,
<linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>, <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <will.deacon@....com>,
<wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>, <linuxarm@...wei.com>,
<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <catalin.marinas@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] lib: logic_pio: Use logical PIO low-level
accessors for !CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO
On 13/06/2019 21:09, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 10:39:12AM +0100, John Garry wrote:
>> On 13/06/2019 03:39, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>> I'm not sure it's even safe, because CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO depends on
>>> ARM64, but PCI_IOBASE is defined on most arches via asm-generic/io.h,
>>> so this potentially affects arches other than ARM64.
>>
>> It would do. It would affect any arch which defines PCI_IOBASE and
>> does not have arch-specific definition of inb et all.
>
Hi Bjorn,
> What's the reason for testing PCI_IOBASE instead of
> CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO? If there's a reason it's needed, that's fine,
> but it does make this much more complicated to review.
For ARM64, we have PCI_IOBASE defined but may not have
CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO defined. Currently CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO is only
selected by CONFIG_HISILICON_LPC.
As such, we should make this change also for when CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO is
not defined.
Thanks,
John
>
> Bjorn
>
> .
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists