From: marc.zyngier@arm.com (Marc Zyngier)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3 00/15] Introducing per-device MSI domain
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 15:25:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <559FD5BC.9070206@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150710133458.GC11270@red-moon>
On 10/07/15 14:34, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 03:35:05PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>> BTW, is there a reason why _all_ arm host bridges rely on
>>> pcibios_msi_controller (so pci_sys_data) instead of initializing
>>> the struct pci_bus.msi pointer to carry out the MSI controller look-up ?
>>
>> Probably an ordering issue - the bus may not be there yet. But ensuring
>> that the MSI domain is created early (before the bus is scanned) should
>> solve that problem nicely enough.
>
> Yes, I think the only reason is that, as sysdata, the msi controller
> pointer is propagated (in pci_alloc_child_bus()), with a tiny difference:
> sysdata can be passed to pci_scan_root_bus(), msi controller pointer
> can't (explicitly) at present.
>
> Since most of the ARM PCI host controllers have been converted to:
>
> - pci_create_root_bus()
>
> -> here we can init bus msi controller pointer
>
> - pci_scan_child_bus()
>
> we could get rid of pcibios_msi_controller on arm _now_ by just initializing
> the msi controller pointer in the struct pci_bus before
> pci_scan_child_bus() is called, unless I am missing something.
>
> I converted pcie-designware.c to stacked domains (and pci-keystone that
> relies on it, with its own quirks of course), I might take the step
> above as an intermediate step to have a common arm/arm64 generic host
> controller asap (ie for that getting rid of pcibios_msi_controller is
> mandatory, which requires converting all ARM host controllers to stacked
> domains, or taking the intermediate step above).
It doesn't look like the two approaches are incompatible. Killing
pcibios_msi_controller is an interesting short term goal which could
happen quite quickly. Converting these host controllers to stacked
domains is obviously more effort, which can happen at its own pace. We
just need to make sure people do not add more cruft to the mix in the
meantime.
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-10 14:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-07 17:17 [PATCH v3 00/15] Introducing per-device MSI domain Marc Zyngier
2015-07-07 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 01/15] genirq: irqdomain: Allow irq domain aliasing Marc Zyngier
2015-07-07 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 02/15] PCI: MSI: Register irq domain with specific token Marc Zyngier
2015-07-07 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 03/15] device core: Introduce per-device MSI domain pointer Marc Zyngier
2015-07-07 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 04/15] PCI/MSI: Add hooks to populate the msi_domain field Marc Zyngier
2015-07-07 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 05/15] PCI/MSI: of: Add support for OF-provided msi_domain Marc Zyngier
2015-07-07 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 06/15] PCI/MSI: of: Allow msi_domain lookup using the host bridge node Marc Zyngier
2015-07-07 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 07/15] PCI/MSI: Let pci_msi_get_domain use struct device's msi_domain Marc Zyngier
2015-07-07 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 08/15] platform: of: Assign MSI domain to platform device Marc Zyngier
2015-07-07 17:17 ` [PATCH v3 09/15] irqchip: gicv3-its: Split PCI/MSI code from the core ITS driver Marc Zyngier
2015-07-08 10:48 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-07-08 11:02 ` Marc Zyngier
2015-07-07 17:18 ` [PATCH v3 10/15] irqchip: gicv3-its: Register irq domain with platform MSI token Marc Zyngier
2015-07-07 17:18 ` [PATCH v3 11/15] irqchip: GICv2m: Get rid of struct msi_controller Marc Zyngier
2015-07-07 17:18 ` [PATCH v3 12/15] irqchip: gicv3-its: " Marc Zyngier
2015-07-07 17:18 ` [PATCH v3 13/15] irqchip: gicv3-its: Make the PCI/MSI code standalone Marc Zyngier
2015-07-07 17:18 ` [PATCH v3 14/15] PCI/MSI: pci-xgene-msi: Get rid of struct msi_controller Marc Zyngier
2015-07-09 22:12 ` Duc Dang
2015-07-10 8:43 ` Marc Zyngier
2015-07-07 17:18 ` [PATCH v3 15/15] PCI/MSI: Drop domain field from msi_controller Marc Zyngier
2015-07-09 13:58 ` [PATCH v3 00/15] Introducing per-device MSI domain Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-07-09 14:35 ` Marc Zyngier
2015-07-10 13:34 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-07-10 14:25 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
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=559FD5BC.9070206@arm.com \
--to=marc.zyngier@arm.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).