linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: jiang.liu@linux.intel.com (Jiang Liu)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC v2 5/7] PCI/ACPI: Consolidate common PCI host bridge code into ACPI core
Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 20:24:21 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55534275.2040404@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55531967.70507@linaro.org>

On 2015/5/13 17:29, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> Hi Jiang,
> 
> On 2015?05?05? 10:46, Jiang Liu wrote:
>> Introduce common interface acpi_pci_root_create() and related data
>> structures to create PCI root bus for ACPI PCI host bridges. It will
>> be used to kill duplicated arch specific code for IA64 and x86. It may
>> also help ARM64 in future.
>>
> [...]
>> diff --git a/include/linux/pci-acpi.h b/include/linux/pci-acpi.h
>> index a965efa52152..a292ee33d74b 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/pci-acpi.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/pci-acpi.h
>> @@ -52,6 +52,30 @@ static inline acpi_handle
>> acpi_pci_get_bridge_handle(struct pci_bus *pbus)
>>       return ACPI_HANDLE(dev);
>>   }
>>
>> +struct acpi_pci_root;
>> +struct acpi_pci_root_ops;
>> +
>> +struct acpi_pci_root_info_common {
>> +    struct pci_controller        controller;
> 
> There is another problem that this patch will lead to
> compile error on ARM64 since ARM64 has basic ACPI support
> in 4.1.
> 
> struct pci_controller        controller is not available
> on ARM64, that's the reason why compile errors happens on ARM64.
> 
> How about move struct pci_controller to this head file?
> 
> because all the related file you changed in this patch set
> are only compiled when CONFI_ACPI=y, so for x86,
> 
> struct pci_controller {
> #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
>         struct acpi_device *companion;  /* ACPI companion device */
> #endif
> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
>         void            *iommu;         /* IOMMU private data */
> #endif
>         int             segment;        /* PCI domain */
>         int             node;           /* NUMA node */
> };
> 
> I'm sure #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI .. #endif can be removed
> with no harm, and for *iommu, we can remove the #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> with introducing little more memory on x86_32, after
> that, the struct pci_controller is almost the same as ia64:

On x86, struct pci_controller may be used when CONFIG_ACPI is disabled.
So we can't move it into pci-acpi.h

> 
> struct pci_controller {
>         struct acpi_device *companion;
>         void *iommu;
>         int segment;
>         int node;               /* nearest node with memory or
> NUMA_NO_NODE for global allocation */
> 
>         void *platform_data;
> };
> 
> except void *platform_data;
> 
> On ARM64, the structure is almost the same, so how about
> introduce
> 
> struct pci_controller {
>         struct acpi_device *companion;  /* ACPI companion device */
>         void            *iommu;         /* IOMMU private data */
>         int             segment;        /* PCI domain */
>         int             node;           /* NUMA node */
> #ifdef CONFIG_IA64   
>     void *platform_data;
> #endif
> };
> 
> in this file, then can be used for all architectures?
Current mode is that architecture defines its own version of
struct pci_controller. It would be better to keep this pattern.
Thanks!
Gerry

> 
> Thanks
> Hanjun

  reply	other threads:[~2015-05-13 12:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-05-05  2:46 [RFC v2 0/7] Consolidate ACPI PCI root common code into ACPI core Jiang Liu
2015-05-05  2:46 ` [RFC v2 1/7] ACPI/PCI: Enhance ACPI core to support sparse IO space Jiang Liu
2015-05-11 13:01   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-05-05  2:46 ` [RFC v2 2/7] ia64/PCI/ACPI: Use common ACPI resource parsing interface for host bridge Jiang Liu
2015-05-11 13:04   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-05-05  2:46 ` [RFC v2 3/7] ia64/PCI: Use common struct resource_entry to replace struct iospace_resource Jiang Liu
2015-05-05  2:46 ` [RFC v2 4/7] x86/PCI: Rename struct pci_sysdata as struct pci_controller Jiang Liu
2015-05-05  2:46 ` [RFC v2 5/7] PCI/ACPI: Consolidate common PCI host bridge code into ACPI core Jiang Liu
2015-05-11 13:36   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-05-13  5:36     ` Jiang Liu
2015-05-13  9:29   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-05-13 12:24     ` Jiang Liu [this message]
2015-05-13 13:25       ` Hanjun Guo
2015-05-14  1:09         ` Jiang Liu
2015-05-14  4:05           ` Hanjun Guo
2015-05-14  4:42             ` Jiang Liu
2015-05-05  2:46 ` [RFC v2 6/7] x86/PCI/ACPI: Use common interface to support PCI host bridge Jiang Liu
2015-05-12 12:19   ` Hanjun Guo
2015-05-13  5:38     ` Jiang Liu
2015-05-05  2:46 ` [RFC v2 7/7] ia64/PCI/ACPI: " Jiang Liu
2015-05-05  3:10 ` [RFC v2 0/7] Consolidate ACPI PCI root common code into ACPI core Hanjun Guo

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=55534275.2040404@linux.intel.com \
    --to=jiang.liu@linux.intel.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).