All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@arm.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
	linux-pci <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>,
	linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	LAKML <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Tanmay Inamdar <tinamdar@apm.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/3] arm64: Add architecture support for PCI
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 17:22:26 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1394950946.15098.111.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201403142010.39886.arnd@arndb.de>

On Fri, 2014-03-14 at 20:10 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > As for the other two functions, I've no special attachment to where they are present
> > and I'm happy to move them into drivers/pci on the condition that the patchset doesn't
> > double in size. The reason why I'm weary of touching other architectures in a significant
> > way is the current lack of engineering bandwidth and way of testing all the architectures.
> > My low friction approach has been to introduce them in arm64 and then slowly move them
> > into core (and yes, I know about good intentions and the road to hell.)
> 
> I think everyone working on PCI is fed up with having arch-specific implementations
> of all these, and Bjorn has been very supportive of generic infrastructure in the
> past. Even just adding a generic infrastructure in a common place that is used
> only by one architecture in my mind would be a significant improvement.

I agree, it's a reasonable approach and microblaze which is simple and just "copied"
powerpc originally would be a good one to move over as well.

powerpc itself has many historical quirks and while I'm interested in a common
implementation, it will take me a bit of spare time to get through things and
figure out what can be done there and what "hooks" might still be necessary.

At this point, it's mostly a matter of:

 - I'm the one who knows the most about the powerpc PCI code as I wrote large
chunks of it

 - I'm very very very busy with some other things at the moment

So don't take my silence on these matters as a lack of interest, I think it's
definitely all going in the right direction, I just don't have much bandwidth
to consider the move of powerpc over just yet.

Cheers,
Ben.



WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: benh@kernel.crashing.org (Benjamin Herrenschmidt)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v7 3/3] arm64: Add architecture support for PCI
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 17:22:26 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1394950946.15098.111.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201403142010.39886.arnd@arndb.de>

On Fri, 2014-03-14 at 20:10 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > As for the other two functions, I've no special attachment to where they are present
> > and I'm happy to move them into drivers/pci on the condition that the patchset doesn't
> > double in size. The reason why I'm weary of touching other architectures in a significant
> > way is the current lack of engineering bandwidth and way of testing all the architectures.
> > My low friction approach has been to introduce them in arm64 and then slowly move them
> > into core (and yes, I know about good intentions and the road to hell.)
> 
> I think everyone working on PCI is fed up with having arch-specific implementations
> of all these, and Bjorn has been very supportive of generic infrastructure in the
> past. Even just adding a generic infrastructure in a common place that is used
> only by one architecture in my mind would be a significant improvement.

I agree, it's a reasonable approach and microblaze which is simple and just "copied"
powerpc originally would be a good one to move over as well.

powerpc itself has many historical quirks and while I'm interested in a common
implementation, it will take me a bit of spare time to get through things and
figure out what can be done there and what "hooks" might still be necessary.

At this point, it's mostly a matter of:

 - I'm the one who knows the most about the powerpc PCI code as I wrote large
chunks of it

 - I'm very very very busy with some other things at the moment

So don't take my silence on these matters as a lack of interest, I think it's
definitely all going in the right direction, I just don't have much bandwidth
to consider the move of powerpc over just yet.

Cheers,
Ben.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
	Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@arm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>,
	Tanmay Inamdar <tinamdar@apm.com>,
	linux-pci <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	LAKML <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/3] arm64: Add architecture support for PCI
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 17:22:26 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1394950946.15098.111.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201403142010.39886.arnd@arndb.de>

On Fri, 2014-03-14 at 20:10 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > As for the other two functions, I've no special attachment to where they are present
> > and I'm happy to move them into drivers/pci on the condition that the patchset doesn't
> > double in size. The reason why I'm weary of touching other architectures in a significant
> > way is the current lack of engineering bandwidth and way of testing all the architectures.
> > My low friction approach has been to introduce them in arm64 and then slowly move them
> > into core (and yes, I know about good intentions and the road to hell.)
> 
> I think everyone working on PCI is fed up with having arch-specific implementations
> of all these, and Bjorn has been very supportive of generic infrastructure in the
> past. Even just adding a generic infrastructure in a common place that is used
> only by one architecture in my mind would be a significant improvement.

I agree, it's a reasonable approach and microblaze which is simple and just "copied"
powerpc originally would be a good one to move over as well.

powerpc itself has many historical quirks and while I'm interested in a common
implementation, it will take me a bit of spare time to get through things and
figure out what can be done there and what "hooks" might still be necessary.

At this point, it's mostly a matter of:

 - I'm the one who knows the most about the powerpc PCI code as I wrote large
chunks of it

 - I'm very very very busy with some other things at the moment

So don't take my silence on these matters as a lack of interest, I think it's
definitely all going in the right direction, I just don't have much bandwidth
to consider the move of powerpc over just yet.

Cheers,
Ben.

  reply	other threads:[~2014-03-16  6:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 95+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-03-14 15:34 [PATCH v7 0/3] Add support for PCI in AArch64 Liviu Dudau
2014-03-14 15:34 ` Liviu Dudau
2014-03-14 15:34 ` Liviu Dudau
2014-03-14 15:34 ` [PATCH v7 1/3] Fix ioport_map() for !CONFIG_GENERIC_IOMAP cases Liviu Dudau
2014-03-14 15:34   ` Liviu Dudau
2014-03-14 15:34 ` [PATCH v7 2/3] arm64: Extend the PCI I/O space to 16MB Liviu Dudau
2014-03-14 15:34   ` Liviu Dudau
2014-03-14 15:34 ` [PATCH v7 3/3] arm64: Add architecture support for PCI Liviu Dudau
2014-03-14 15:34   ` Liviu Dudau
2014-03-14 17:14   ` Catalin Marinas
2014-03-14 17:14     ` Catalin Marinas
2014-03-14 17:38     ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-03-14 17:38       ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-03-14 17:38       ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-03-14 18:05       ` Liviu Dudau
2014-03-14 18:05         ` Liviu Dudau
2014-03-14 19:10         ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-03-14 19:10           ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-03-16  6:22           ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2014-03-16  6:22             ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-03-16  6:22             ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-03-17 17:38         ` Catalin Marinas
2014-03-17 17:38           ` Catalin Marinas
2014-03-17 18:05           ` Liviu Dudau
2014-03-17 18:05             ` Liviu Dudau
2014-03-19 13:56             ` Catalin Marinas
2014-03-19 13:56               ` Catalin Marinas
2014-03-19 17:21               ` Liviu Dudau
2014-03-19 17:21                 ` Liviu Dudau
2014-03-19 17:53                 ` Rob Herring
2014-03-19 17:53                   ` Rob Herring
2014-03-19 17:53                   ` Rob Herring
2014-03-19 18:36                   ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-03-19 18:36                     ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-03-19 18:37                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-03-19 18:37                   ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-03-20  9:46                   ` Liviu Dudau
2014-03-20  9:46                     ` Liviu Dudau
2014-03-20 11:17                     ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-03-20 11:17                       ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-03-20 11:38                       ` Liviu Dudau
2014-03-20 11:38                         ` Liviu Dudau
2014-03-20 12:26                         ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-03-20 12:26                           ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-03-20 12:26                           ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-03-20 12:50                           ` Liviu Dudau
2014-03-20 12:50                             ` Liviu Dudau
2014-03-17 16:05   ` Rob Herring
2014-03-17 16:05     ` Rob Herring
2014-03-17 16:05     ` Rob Herring
2014-03-17 16:22     ` Liviu Dudau
2014-03-17 16:22       ` Liviu Dudau
2014-04-07 23:58   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2014-04-07 23:58     ` Bjorn Helgaas
2014-04-08  9:52     ` Liviu Dudau
2014-04-08  9:52       ` Liviu Dudau
2014-04-08  9:52       ` Liviu Dudau
2014-04-22  8:58 ` [PATCH v7 0/3] Add support for PCI in AArch64 Sandeepa Prabhu
2014-04-22  8:58   ` Sandeepa Prabhu
2014-04-22 10:11   ` Liviu Dudau
2014-04-22 10:11     ` Liviu Dudau
2014-04-22 10:11     ` Liviu Dudau
2014-04-22 11:50     ` Sandeepa Prabhu
2014-04-22 11:50       ` Sandeepa Prabhu
2014-04-22 12:34       ` Liviu Dudau
2014-04-22 12:34         ` Liviu Dudau
2014-04-23 20:32       ` Tanmay Inamdar
2014-04-23 20:32         ` Tanmay Inamdar
2014-04-24  3:08         ` Sandeepa Prabhu
2014-04-24  3:08           ` Sandeepa Prabhu
2014-05-16 10:33 ` Sunil Kovvuri
2014-05-16 10:33   ` Sunil Kovvuri
2014-05-16 13:24   ` Liviu Dudau
2014-05-16 13:24     ` Liviu Dudau
2014-05-16 13:24     ` Liviu Dudau
2014-05-16 17:42     ` Sunil Kovvuri
2014-05-16 17:42       ` Sunil Kovvuri
2014-05-21 11:15       ` Sunil Kovvuri
2014-05-21 11:15         ` Sunil Kovvuri
2014-05-21 11:34         ` Liviu Dudau
2014-05-21 11:34           ` Liviu Dudau
2014-05-21 11:34           ` Liviu Dudau
2014-05-21 17:06           ` Jason Gunthorpe
2014-05-21 17:06             ` Jason Gunthorpe
2014-05-21 17:06             ` Jason Gunthorpe
2014-05-19 13:01   ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-05-19 13:01     ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-05-20  4:22     ` Sunil Kovvuri
2014-05-20  4:22       ` Sunil Kovvuri
2014-05-20  8:44       ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-05-20  8:44         ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-05-20  8:44         ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-05-20  8:55         ` Sunil Kovvuri
2014-05-20  8:55           ` Sunil Kovvuri
2014-05-20  8:55           ` Sunil Kovvuri

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1394950946.15098.111.camel@pasglop \
    --to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=Catalin.Marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=Liviu.Dudau@arm.com \
    --cc=Will.Deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
    --cc=linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tinamdar@apm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.