From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com ([119.145.14.65]:28606 "EHLO szxga02-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753064AbbGBBi6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jul 2015 21:38:58 -0400 Message-ID: <55949615.1070304@hisilicon.com> Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2015 09:38:29 +0800 From: Zhou Wang MIME-Version: 1.0 To: James Morse CC: Gabriele Paoloni , Bjorn Helgaas , Jingoo Han , Pratyush Anand , Arnd Bergmann , Liviu Dudau , "kishon@ti.com" , "xobs@kosagi.com" , "m-karicheri2@ti.com" , "Minghuan.Lian@freescale.com" , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , Yuanzhichang , Zhudacai , zhangjukuo , qiuzhenfa , "liguozhu@hisilicon.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] PCI: designware: Add ARM64 support References: <1435743817-19083-1-git-send-email-wangzhou1@hisilicon.com> <1435743817-19083-3-git-send-email-wangzhou1@hisilicon.com> <5593F899.6050306@arm.com> <55942441.3050705@arm.com> In-Reply-To: <55942441.3050705@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 2015/7/2 1:32, James Morse wrote: > Gabriele Paoloni wrote: >>> Both series are applied to v4.1, use the same .config file, and the >>> same dtb. >>> I will investigate further. >>> >>> (Re-testing v2 works, so this isn't an interim hardware failure) >> >> This is a bit weird.... >> >> Patch 2/5 is the only one that affect platforms different from Hisilicon >> >> The only difference between V3 patch[2/5] and v2 patch[2/4] is > > Between v3:2/5 and your replacement for v2:2/4, which arrived after I had > tested the v2 series. As the patch has been replaced with a different one - > neither 'tested-by' is true any more. > Hi James, Firstly, many thanks for your test! Yes. v3:2/5 had merged Gabriele's codes in. So if you made test on original v2 patchset and v3 patchset, I think the differences include Gabriele's codes and codes in pci-keystone-dw.c. As the patch has been replaced with a different one, I think I should have added 'tested-by' after it passes your test, is this right? > It looks like the BAR containing the bridge window is not being assigned, > so no devices on bus 1 are discovered. > > I will send the full v2 and v3 dmesg output separately. > Thanks, I will debug the problem according your log. Regards, Zhou > > Thanks, > > James > > > . > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: wangzhou1@hisilicon.com (Zhou Wang) Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2015 09:38:29 +0800 Subject: [PATCH v3 2/5] PCI: designware: Add ARM64 support In-Reply-To: <55942441.3050705@arm.com> References: <1435743817-19083-1-git-send-email-wangzhou1@hisilicon.com> <1435743817-19083-3-git-send-email-wangzhou1@hisilicon.com> <5593F899.6050306@arm.com> <55942441.3050705@arm.com> Message-ID: <55949615.1070304@hisilicon.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 2015/7/2 1:32, James Morse wrote: > Gabriele Paoloni wrote: >>> Both series are applied to v4.1, use the same .config file, and the >>> same dtb. >>> I will investigate further. >>> >>> (Re-testing v2 works, so this isn't an interim hardware failure) >> >> This is a bit weird.... >> >> Patch 2/5 is the only one that affect platforms different from Hisilicon >> >> The only difference between V3 patch[2/5] and v2 patch[2/4] is > > Between v3:2/5 and your replacement for v2:2/4, which arrived after I had > tested the v2 series. As the patch has been replaced with a different one - > neither 'tested-by' is true any more. > Hi James, Firstly, many thanks for your test! Yes. v3:2/5 had merged Gabriele's codes in. So if you made test on original v2 patchset and v3 patchset, I think the differences include Gabriele's codes and codes in pci-keystone-dw.c. As the patch has been replaced with a different one, I think I should have added 'tested-by' after it passes your test, is this right? > It looks like the BAR containing the bridge window is not being assigned, > so no devices on bus 1 are discovered. > > I will send the full v2 and v3 dmesg output separately. > Thanks, I will debug the problem according your log. Regards, Zhou > > Thanks, > > James > > > . >