From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Julien Grall Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] xen: arm: handle PCI DT node ranges and interrupt-map properties Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 17:00:15 +0000 Message-ID: <55070C1F.9090808@linaro.org> References: <1426180569.32572.72.camel@citrix.com> <1426180624-27759-3-git-send-email-ian.campbell@citrix.com> <55070161.8080105@linaro.org> <1426522953.18247.104.camel@citrix.com> <550706EE.7010106@linaro.org> <1426524375.18247.120.camel@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1426524375.18247.120.camel@citrix.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Ian Campbell Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org, tim@xen.org, vijay.kilari@gmail.com, Suravee Suthikulanit , stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 16/03/15 16:46, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Mon, 2015-03-16 at 16:38 +0000, Julien Grall wrote: >> On 16/03/15 16:22, Ian Campbell wrote: >>>>> + if ( dt_device_type_is_equal(dev, "pci") ) >>>>> + return map_pci_device_ranges(d, dev, ranges, len); >>>>> + >>>>> + printk("Cannot handle ranges for non-PCI device %s type %s\n", >>>>> + dt_node_name(dev), dev->type); >>>>> + >>>> >>>> Is the printk really necessary? It will a spurious log on platform where >>>> ranges is not empty (midway, arndale, foundation model...). >>> >>> If the ranges is present and non-empty it's not impossible that we need >>> to be doing something with it. I'd rather try and figure out how to >>> whitelist such nodes, perhaps they lack a dev_type completely? >> >> Why would we compute the range? Any usable MMIO should be describe the >> child. >> >> We have to compute the ranges for PCI because we want to map everything >> at boot time and the PCI devices are not discoverable via the device tree... > > The same would be true for any similar discoverable bus. > > Which I suppose is uncommon on ARM. I think I'll make this a debug level > print, or even a #if DT_DEBUG. (Same for the interrupt case) I'm ok with this solution. With Maybe adding a comment explaining that we may need to parse it for discoverable bus? Regards, -- Julien Grall