[RFC v2 5/7] PCI/ACPI: Consolidate common PCI host bridge code into ACPI core

[jiang.liu@linux.intel.com (Jiang Liu)]

On 2015/5/14 12:05, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> On 2015?05?14? 09:09, Jiang Liu wrote:
>> On 2015/5/13 21:25, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>>> On 2015?05?13? 20:24, Jiang Liu wrote:
>>>> On 2015/5/13 17:29, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>>>>> Hi Jiang,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2015?05?05? 10:46, Jiang Liu wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> OK, thanks for the clarify :) So how about add my basic
>>> PCI support patch for ARM64 on top of you patch set to fix
>>> this problem?
>>
>> Sure, please send me the patches and I will send out v3 to
>> cover your review comments.
> 
> OK, I need to rework my patches because my patch set is dependent
> on top of another MMCFG refactor patch set [1], so I need to remove
> MMCONFIG first then will speed up the upstream process of your patch
> set, will send you the patches soon.
Hi Hanjun,
	I will send out v3 soon , so you could rebase onto v3.
There are changes which will affect your rebase.
Thanks!
Gerry
> 
> [1]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/17/29
> 
> Thanks
> Hanjun