From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: gary.hook@amd.com (Gary R Hook) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 11:25:46 -0600 Subject: [PATCH V4 11/26] iommu/amd: deprecate pci_get_bus_and_slot() In-Reply-To: <9014a9e1-9545-4f3c-08c2-8e8eb4762101@codeaurora.org> References: <1513661883-28662-1-git-send-email-okaya@codeaurora.org> <1513661883-28662-12-git-send-email-okaya@codeaurora.org> <8a5dad82-2886-2a51-28bc-b84ab253c361@codeaurora.org> <46ccdb85-1c23-c9eb-994c-9a66e6fce7cc@amd.com> <9014a9e1-9545-4f3c-08c2-8e8eb4762101@codeaurora.org> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 01/04/2018 10:32 AM, Sinan Kaya wrote: > On 1/4/2018 11:28 AM, Gary R Hook wrote: >> On 01/04/2018 06:25 AM, Sinan Kaya wrote: >>> On 12/19/2017 12:37 AM, Sinan Kaya wrote: >>>> pci_get_bus_and_slot() is restrictive such that it assumes domain=0 as >>>> where a PCI device is present. This restricts the device drivers to be >>>> reused for other domain numbers. >>>> >>>> Getting ready to remove pci_get_bus_and_slot() function in favor of >>>> pci_get_domain_bus_and_slot(). >>>> >>>> Hard-code the domain number as 0 for the AMD IOMMU driver. >> >> >> >>> >>> Any comments from the IOMMU people? >>> >> >> pci_get_bus_and_slot() appears to (now) be a convenience function that wraps pci_get_domain_bus_and_slot() while using a 0 for the domain value. Exactly what you are doing here, albeit in a more overt way. >> >> How is this patch advantageous? Seems to me that if other domains need to be enabled, that driver could be changed if and when that requirement arises. >> >> But perhaps I'm missing a nuance here. >> >> > > The benefit of the change was discussed here: > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/12/19/349 > > I hope it helps. > > Thank you for pointing out that thread directly. I read through it and thought further about this change. I am not the maintainer, but as an AMD developer, this is fine change. I can't ACK but I can agree. Gary