Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] arm: pcibios: remove pci_sys_data domain

[Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>]

[Dropped Anton, his email address bounces]

On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 04:25:52PM +0000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 11:44:46AM +0000, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> 
> > Code in drivers/pci/pci-mvebu.c has been changed to add a domain
> > number to PCI resources by using the nr value coming from the setup
> > pcibios32 callback, which may not be correct and should be considered
> > a temporary solution waiting for review comments.
> 
> The intent of the string was to have the domain number so that
> resources in /proc/iomem can be correlated with lspci.
> 
> This would be a 'best practice' - all PCI drivers need to request
> resource, and the resource should be relatable back to the PCI
> domain... So it would be best if the domain number was available at
> this point in a driver's flow.

It is not available with the new approach and the generic PCI domains since
the set-up hook is called before creating the pci_bus. That's why
I mentioned that in the cover letter, and that's good it caught your
attention.

On a side note, when the resources are parsed from DT ranges, ie in:

of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources()

the resources won't contain the domain number you are looking for here, for
the records, so we'd better find an agreement sooner rather than later.

> > -       snprintf(pcie->mem_name, sizeof(pcie->mem_name), "PCI MEM %04x",
> > -                domain);
> > +       snprintf(pcie->mem_name, sizeof(pcie->mem_name), "PCI MEM %04x", nr);
> 
> I'm not sure what 'nr' is in this context, if it is not the domain
> number then I'd just drop the 0x04x entirely rather than include
> some nonsense number...

nr is the index (0 to nr_controllers) in struct hw_pci of the controller
being set-up. For this driver it is always 0, and BTW, sys->domain was 0 too
and I do not see any code that can change its value to anything other
than 0, at least in the mainline kernel.

So basically I could go as far as sticking 0000 to the string given the
current code. I did not drop the 0x04x entirely since I do not want to break
userspace, I was tempted though, let me know if I am allowed to do that.

Thanks,
Lorenzo