From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 431F7C982D6 for ; Thu, 17 Sep 2026 15:59:39 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:References: List-Owner; bh=BcZKonsEm6iNlR2z607KW+Ej9GYIpjgHVKnzVdpC+VI=; b=JGc8OnSvXUdI33 IsnTTfTRMAcL7TowbmRhilrqWy35t0wuzCntsZw4ap/s3IHrSqwubF6NgX88CTgXXceOJG7bxOIq9 BNxZJ2NjJaydIW1JkLspdRAedDoxQElZg4xwZGsvPpHlDoLg1NIGdubix4YM29NlPGFas0qe2HVzj 650RMWKAnYUUK2RL5PWa5JEIwp/VEF5g43COPtpM/7g1l5YeTkdr4bkxMFDxOX5t70FhDxsvCO9WH SzRA1yeOw5hKx19orSkGJMo6Ysy+9SIhfs7NB9twMADkjJ4YEFeGhuA8OS51UgiTFgp51LVNvfEMV k3ktdVuBcAqcaoGDE5VQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1x7EWL-0000000BnCv-1Az6; Thu, 17 Sep 2026 15:59:33 +0000 Received: from tor.source.kernel.org ([172.105.4.254]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1x7EWK-0000000BnCQ-0P8F for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 17 Sep 2026 15:59:32 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (quasi.space.kernel.org [100.103.45.18]) by tor.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8ABE960210; Thu, 17 Sep 2026 15:59:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 176A61F00893; Thu, 17 Sep 2026 15:59:31 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1789660771; bh=BcZKonsEm6iNlR2z607KW+Ej9GYIpjgHVKnzVdpC+VI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To; b=VOt1Pnuv0J5qzuS/czmoPrZ8YpgfWW/bLej1RS+9XXu3txiRsUSdsbe7m1OdNV5gK /MQk0j+5+h1hcHe6uQMCH6HujFlskKkENo9k/vZCLIobcHKtgndh0c0Rlhql0kcO58 sa8QWn67QcAeLJ5FX071zkZKGrG1FAiJu5AluIffCCebomScUSrr46rSHYRGg9OIu0 OkZudqQwsJnlrOTmYUd2ypaQqcQsqHpgKfjtrCX+x127+ynJIrc8zD8bdDLAYXUEii +gmKPPmcWrW6XXfIpA4cq0YZX8tXsjwqj+LD9tom6Ndhs6EaCf5+5jF3taEo7s4oux a2GvJXCj3TlLg== Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2026 10:59:29 -0500 From: Bjorn Helgaas To: Semih Baskan Cc: lpieralisi@kernel.org, kwilczynski@kernel.org, mani@kernel.org, robh@kernel.org, bhelgaas@google.com, rjui@broadcom.com, sbranden@broadcom.com, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com, rafal@milecki.pl, zajec5@gmail.com, florian.fainelli@broadcom.com, arnd@arndb.de, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rosenp@gmail.com, rani.hod@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: iproc: Use pci_alloc_host_bridge() on BCMA Message-ID: <20260917155929.GA1023894@bhelgaas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Thu, Sep 17, 2026 at 08:40:00AM +0300, Semih Baskan wrote: > On Wed, Sep 16, 2026 at 03:01:10PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > If bcma finds both of these devices via EROM, why do they need a > > "brcm,iproc-pcie" compatible? If we omitted that compatible, what > > would break? > > bcma does not need it. pcie-iproc-platform does. And why do we need pcie-iproc-platform, since pcie-iproc-bcma.c will claim them? Is there a requirement that pcie-iproc-platform must be able to claim the PCI host bridge if CONFIG_PCIE_IPROC_BCMA is not enabled?