Message-ID: <3f39d8a2-2e57-a671-2926-eb4f2bf20c76@huawei.com>
Date:   Wed, 5 Jan 2022 17:42:16 +0000
From:   John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
To:     Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
CC:     Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-cisco@...all.nl>,
        Ettore Chimenti <ek5.chimenti@...il.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Nick Hu <nickhu@...estech.com>,
        Greentime Hu <green.hu@...il.com>,
        Vincent Chen <deanbo422@...il.com>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        "Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>,
        Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>,
        "Ian Abbott" <abbotti@....co.uk>,
        H Hartley Sweeten <hsweeten@...ionengravers.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
        Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        "Karsten Keil" <isdn@...ux-pingi.de>,
        Sathya Prakash <sathya.prakash@...adcom.com>,
        Sreekanth Reddy <sreekanth.reddy@...adcom.com>,
        Suganath Prabu Subramani 
        <suganath-prabu.subramani@...adcom.com>,
        Michael Grzeschik <m.grzeschik@...gutronix.de>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
        Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>, Jouni Malinen <j@...fi>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.com>,
        Kashyap Desai <kashyap.desai@...adcom.com>,
        Sumit Saxena <sumit.saxena@...adcom.com>,
        Shivasharan S <shivasharan.srikanteshwara@...adcom.com>,
        Nilesh Javali <njavali@...vell.com>,
        <GR-QLogic-Storage-Upstream@...vell.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>,
        "Teddy Wang" <teddy.wang@...iconmotion.com>,
        Forest Bond <forest@...ttletooquiet.net>,
        Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
        "Wim Van Sebroeck" <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
        "Takashi Iwai" <tiwai@...e.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-csky@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>, <MPT-FusionLinux.pdl@...adcom.com>,
        <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>, <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
        <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>, <megaraidlinux.pdl@...adcom.com>,
        <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>, <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 01/32] Kconfig: introduce and depend on LEGACY_PCI

On 29/12/2021 16:55, Niklas Schnelle wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-12-29 at 10:03 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 01:12:07PM +0100, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
>>> Em Wed, 29 Dec 2021 12:45:38 +0100
>>> Niklas Schnelle<schnelle@...ux.ibm.com>  escreveu:
>>>> ...
>>>> I do think we agree that once done correctly there is value in
>>>> such an option independent of HAS_IOPORT only gating inb() etc uses.
>> I'm not sure I'm convinced about this.  For s390, you could do this
>> patch series, where you don't define inb() at all, and you add new
>> dependencies to prevent compile errors.  Or you could define inb() to
>> return ~0, which is what happens on other platforms when the device is
>> not present.
>>
>>> Personally, I don't see much value on a Kconfig var for legacy PCI I/O
>>> space. From maintenance PoV, bots won't be triggered if someone use
>>> HAS_IOPORT instead of the PCI specific one - or vice-versa. So, we
>>> could end having a mix of both at the wrong places, in long term.
>>>
>>> Also, assuming that PCIe hardware will some day abandon support for
>>> "legacy" PCI I/O space, I guess some runtime logic would be needed,
>>> in order to work with both kinds of PCIe controllers. So, having a
>>> Kconfig option won't help much, IMO.
>>>
>>> So, my personal preference would be to have just one Kconfig var, but
>>> I'm ok if the PCI maintainers decide otherwise.
>> I don't really like the "LEGACY_PCI" Kconfig option.  "Legacy" just
>> means something old and out of favor; it doesn't say*what*  that
>> something is.
>>
>> I think you're specifically interested in I/O port space usage, and it
>> seems that you want all PCI drivers that*only*  use I/O port space to
>> depend on LEGACY_PCI?  Drivers that can use either I/O or memory
>> space or both would not depend on LEGACY_PCI?  This seems a little
>> murky and error-prone.
> I'd like to hear Arnd's opinion on this but you're the PCI maintainer
> so of course your buy-in would be quite important for such an option.
> 

Hi Niklas,

I can't see the value in the LEGACY_PCI config - however I don't really 
understand Arnd's original intention.

It was written that it would allow us to control "whether we have any 
pre-PCIe devices or those PCIe drivers that need PIO accessors other 
than ioport_map()/pci_iomap()".

However I just don't see why CONFIG_PCI=y and CONFIG_HAS_IOPORT=y aren't 
always the gating factor here. Arnd?

Thanks,
John

Powered by blists - more mailing lists