[PATCH v0 06/10] arm: orion5x: Add DT-based support for Netgear WNR854T

Arnd Bergmann
2016-07-19T09:46:44Z

On Tuesday, July 19, 2016 10:40:16 AM CEST Jamie Lentin wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jul 2016, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
> > On Monday, July 18, 2016 11:44:24 AM CEST Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 22:41:35 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >>
> >>> I would assume that the PCIe port should work out of the box with the driver
> >>
> >> Unfortunately, no. The PCIe on Orion5x requires a workaround for
> >> reading/writing the PCI configuration space. Instead of doing MMIO
> >> accesses to PCIE_CONF_ADDR_OFF / PCIE_CONF_DATA_OFF, you must map a
> >> MBus window, which provides a memory-mapped view of the PCI
> >> configuration space.
> >>
> >> Definitely not impossible to implement, but the driver doesn't work
> >> as-is.
> >
> > Ok.
>
> Unfortunately this isn't something I can test as the PCIe port on the SoC
> doesn't go anywhere in my case.

As I said, this wouldn't be a problem: we should consider the PCI and PCIe
ports on this chip as completely separate anyway, so we can work on
the drivers independently.

> >>> We also don't seem to need any MBUS window setup for the I/O and
> >>> memory spaces, which greatly simplifies the driver compared to the
> >>> pci-mvebu one, it would be a fairly straightforward implementation
> >>> based on pci-host-generic.c (which unfortunately just got way
> >>> more complicated and might need to go on a diet).
> >>
> >> MBus windows are needed. See:
> >>
> >> mvebu_mbus_add_window_remap_by_id(ORION_MBUS_PCI_IO_TARGET,
> >> ORION_MBUS_PCI_IO_ATTR,
> >> ORION5X_PCI_IO_PHYS_BASE,
> >> ORION5X_PCI_IO_SIZE,
> >> ORION5X_PCI_IO_BUS_BASE);
> >> mvebu_mbus_add_window_by_id(ORION_MBUS_PCI_MEM_TARGET,
> >> ORION_MBUS_PCI_MEM_ATTR,
> >> ORION5X_PCI_MEM_PHYS_BASE,
> >> ORION5X_PCI_MEM_SIZE);
> >>
> >> in orion5x_setup_wins().
> >
> > Ok, I was just looking at the wrong file, as they are set up from
> > common.c, not pci.c.
> >
> >> Note that we already have some Orion5x converted to DT, and that use
> >> PCI: board-rd88f5182.c is an example. So we could very well take Jamie
> >> patches as-is, and move later to a DT-representation for PCI/PCIe.
> >
> > Ah, I thought all the DT users were moved to mach-mvebu. I agree
> > this new patch isn't introducing anything we don't already have then,
> > so we can just take it, but the conversion will not be nice when
> > we do that.
>
> Yes, board-wnr854t.c is a clone of the existing board-rd88f5182.c.
> Although I'd presume that it too would need late_initcall() or somesuch
> mechanism to probe PCI once the GPIO controller is available.

Deferred probing should be fine once the driver is migrated from
pci_common_init() to registering the host bridge directly.

Arnd