From: jchandra@broadcom.com (Jayachandran C.)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3 1/2] PCI: generic: remove dependency on hw_pci
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 15:43:52 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150730101351.GA31408@jayachandranc.netlogicmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150730092808.GA4685@red-moon>
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:28:08AM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 04:28:00PM +0100, Jayachandran C wrote:
> > The current code in pci-host-generic.c uses pci_common_init_dev()
> > from ARM platform to do some of the PCI initializations, and this
> > prevents it from being used in ARM64.
> >
> > The initialization done by pci_common_init_dev() that is needed
> > by pci-host-generic.c is really limited, and can be done easily
> > in the same file without using hw_pci API. The ARM platform
> > requires a pci_sys_data as sysdata for the PCI bus, this can be
> > handled by setting up gen_pci to have a pci_sys_data variable as
> > the first element.
>
> Ok, I still do not like leaving pci_sys_data there, and to remove
> it there is only one snag (+ one patch to prevent
> resources enablement on ARM64 PROBE_ONLY systems to have a
> consolidated ARM/ARM64 host generic), which consists in removing the
> align_resource pointer from pci_sys_data. A proposed solution (maybe
> not ideal, we can consider it a temporary step to make progress)
> here:
>
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2015-July/359273.html
>
> Comments very appreciated on the patch above, I do not have major
> concerns with this patch other than the pci_sys_data hack, because
> that's what it is.
In may opinion, we have to leave ->sysdata on ARM pointing to a valid
pci_sys_data. Leaving it pointing to random stuff and hoping that it
will not be used is pretty bad - so I don't see why such a patch would
make it upstream.
The second issue I have is adding dependencies between patches that
enable basic functionality on arm64 with arm infrastructure cleanup
patches. Given the number of kernel releases the cleanups take [and
factoring in the amount of mess arm has :)], we will end up waiting
a long time for arm64.
BTW, I am not sure why there is a pushback on wrapping a structure in
another, container_of() is the linux way of doing things :)
JC.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-30 10:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-29 15:28 [PATCH v3 1/2] PCI: generic: remove dependency on hw_pci Jayachandran C
2015-07-29 15:28 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] PCI: generic: add arm64 support Jayachandran C
2015-07-29 16:25 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-07-30 9:28 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] PCI: generic: remove dependency on hw_pci Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-07-30 10:13 ` Jayachandran C. [this message]
2015-07-30 13:49 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-07-30 13:35 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-07-31 16:07 ` Jayachandran C.
2015-07-31 16:27 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-08-03 13:11 ` Will Deacon
2015-08-03 23:24 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-07-30 16:45 ` Rob Herring
2015-08-04 7:35 ` Pavel Fedin
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=20150730101351.GA31408@jayachandranc.netlogicmicro.com \
--to=jchandra@broadcom.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).