From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] ARM64 / PCI: introduce struct pci_controller for
 ACPI
Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 01:20:40 +0800
Message-ID: <5564AB68.6080502@linux.intel.com>
References: <1432644564-24746-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> <1432644564-24746-2-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> <20150526165844.GD2175@e106497-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20150526165844.GD2175@e106497-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@arm.com>, Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>, Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Yijing Wang <wangyijing@huawei.com>, Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com>, Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>, "suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com" <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>, "msalter@redhat.com" <msalter@redhat.com>, "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org>
List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org

On 2015/5/27 0:58, Liviu Dudau wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 01:49:14PM +0100, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>> ARM64 ACPI based PCI host bridge init needs a arch dependent
>> struct pci_controller to accommodate common PCI host bridge
>> code which is introduced later, or it will lead to compile
>> errors on ARM64.
> 
> Hi Hanjun,
> 
> Two questions: why don't you introduce this patch next to the
> one that is going to make use of it (or even merge it there)?
> Second, why is the whole struct pci_controller not surrounded
> by #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI as you are implying that this is needed
> only for ACPI?
> 
> Btw, looking through the whole series I'm not (yet) convinced
> that this is needed at all.
Hi Liviu,
	This structure is required by the requested patch set
at http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/472249/, which consolidates
the common code to support PCI host bridge into ACPI core.
Thanks!
Gerry

> 
> Best regards,
> Liviu
> 
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
>> Tested-by: Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com>
>> CC: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>> CC: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
>> CC: Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@arm.com>
>> CC: Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com>
>> CC: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/pci.h | 10 ++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pci.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pci.h
>> index b008a72..7088495 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pci.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pci.h
>> @@ -10,6 +10,16 @@
>>  #include <asm-generic/pci-bridge.h>
>>  #include <asm-generic/pci-dma-compat.h>
>>  
>> +struct acpi_device;
>> +
>> +struct pci_controller {
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
>> +	struct acpi_device *companion;	/* ACPI companion device */
>> +#endif
>> +	int		segment;	/* PCI domain */
>> +	int		node;		/* NUMA node */
>> +};
>> +
>>  #define PCIBIOS_MIN_IO		0x1000
>>  #define PCIBIOS_MIN_MEM		0
>>  
>> -- 
>> 1.9.1
>>
>