From: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
To: Vincent Whitchurch <vincent.whitchurch@axis.com>
Cc: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
"linux-um@lists.infradead.org" <linux-um@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel <kernel@axis.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] virt-pci: add platform bus support
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2023 18:31:32 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230307003132.GA6366-robh@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y+t6qXBxLqf/+eQM@axis.com>
On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 01:12:25PM +0100, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 06:54:49PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > On Fri, 2023-01-27 at 15:30 +0100, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
> > > My first approach to getting platform drivers working on UML was by
> > > adding a minimal PCI-to-platform bridge driver, which worked without
> > > modifications to virt-pci, but that got shot down:
> > >
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230120-simple-mfd-pci-v1-1-c46b3d6601ef@axis.com/
> >
> > Reading through that ... OK that isn't fun either :-)
> >
> > Sounds like there's a use case for something else though, but the PCI
> > IDs issue also makes that thorny.
>
> Yes, Greg was initially totally opposed to the idea of putting platform
> devices under PCI devices, but in his latest email he seemed to
> allow it in some cases. It's still unclear if he'd be OK with a
> "virtual PCI-to-platform bridge" though. And yes, adding platform
> devices support like in this patch removes one layer and also eliminates
> the disadvantage of having to wait for user space to specify a PCI ID
> for the bridge device.
Like I said in that thread, we have multiple usecases needing something
similar for non-discoverable MMIO devices behind a PCI device. And I
convinced Greg a platform device was okay, so please continue that path.
I'm adding you to the thread of other usecases.
Rob
_______________________________________________
linux-um mailing list
linux-um@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-um
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
To: Vincent Whitchurch <vincent.whitchurch@axis.com>
Cc: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
"linux-um@lists.infradead.org" <linux-um@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel <kernel@axis.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] virt-pci: add platform bus support
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2023 18:31:32 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230307003132.GA6366-robh@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y+t6qXBxLqf/+eQM@axis.com>
On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 01:12:25PM +0100, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 06:54:49PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > On Fri, 2023-01-27 at 15:30 +0100, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
> > > My first approach to getting platform drivers working on UML was by
> > > adding a minimal PCI-to-platform bridge driver, which worked without
> > > modifications to virt-pci, but that got shot down:
> > >
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230120-simple-mfd-pci-v1-1-c46b3d6601ef@axis.com/
> >
> > Reading through that ... OK that isn't fun either :-)
> >
> > Sounds like there's a use case for something else though, but the PCI
> > IDs issue also makes that thorny.
>
> Yes, Greg was initially totally opposed to the idea of putting platform
> devices under PCI devices, but in his latest email he seemed to
> allow it in some cases. It's still unclear if he'd be OK with a
> "virtual PCI-to-platform bridge" though. And yes, adding platform
> devices support like in this patch removes one layer and also eliminates
> the disadvantage of having to wait for user space to specify a PCI ID
> for the bridge device.
Like I said in that thread, we have multiple usecases needing something
similar for non-discoverable MMIO devices behind a PCI device. And I
convinced Greg a platform device was okay, so please continue that path.
I'm adding you to the thread of other usecases.
Rob
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-07 0:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-27 14:30 [PATCH] virt-pci: add platform bus support Vincent Whitchurch
2023-01-27 14:30 ` Vincent Whitchurch
2023-02-13 17:54 ` Johannes Berg
2023-02-13 17:54 ` Johannes Berg
2023-02-13 18:09 ` Richard Weinberger
2023-02-13 18:09 ` Richard Weinberger
2023-02-14 12:12 ` Vincent Whitchurch
2023-02-14 12:12 ` Vincent Whitchurch
2023-02-28 17:39 ` Johannes Berg
2023-02-28 17:39 ` Johannes Berg
2023-03-07 0:31 ` Rob Herring [this message]
2023-03-07 0:31 ` Rob Herring
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=20230307003132.GA6366-robh@kernel.org \
--to=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=kernel@axis.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-um@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=vincent.whitchurch@axis.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.