From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) id f9U0JxO28093 for linux-mips-outgoing; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 16:19:59 -0800 Received: from hermes.mvista.com (gateway-1237.mvista.com [12.44.186.158]) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) with SMTP id f9U0Jr028089 for ; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 16:19:53 -0800 Received: from mvista.com (IDENT:jsun@orion.mvista.com [10.0.0.75]) by hermes.mvista.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f9U0LfB12216; Mon, 29 Oct 2001 16:21:41 -0800 Message-ID: <3BDDF222.56105220@mvista.com> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 16:19:46 -0800 From: Jun Sun X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.18 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Bradley D. LaRonde" CC: linux-mips@oss.sgi.com, linux-mips-kernel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Linux-mips-kernel]Re: PATCH: pci_auto bridge support References: <20011026210746.A20395@dev1.ltc.com> <3BDDACD2.7121F905@mvista.com> <04c801c160b0$1d62f660$3501010a@ltc.com> <3BDDDA7A.329F827D@mvista.com> <066201c160d5$eb51ed40$3501010a@ltc.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk "Bradley D. LaRonde" wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jun Sun" > To: "Bradley D. LaRonde" > Cc: ; > Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 5:38 PM > Subject: [Linux-mips-kernel]Re: PATCH: pci_auto bridge support > > > "Bradley D. LaRonde" wrote: > > > > > > I considered that, but since only this small chuck of run-once surrogate > > > bios autoconfig code needs to know, I figured better keep it separate. > > > > > > > I would vote to put it inside the hose structure: > > > > . It makes a workaround look like a real fix. :-) > > > > . In other implementations of pci_auto, hose is the private sys data of a > pci > > dev. Having a bus number inside is very useful (e.g., pci_ops can tell > whether > > it is type0 of type1 configuration based on the bus number rather than a > shaky > > NULL parent bus pointer). In the future, all pci_auto should be combined > into > > the pci driver. So that is probably the right direction to go. > > > > I think hose may evolve to be the data structure that represents the > topology > > of PCI buses. It should have more uses in the future (e.g., the standard > IRQ > > routing across PCI-PCI bridges). > > Isn't the bus topology already adequately represented in the pci_dev and > pci_channel structures? > Not really. For example, we don't know which bus is the sub-bus of which, directly, and how their address space translate into each other. Those data structures are needed when we start to support dynamically mapped and/or arbitrarily mapped PCI memory spaces. > I look at the pci autoconfig stuff as a bios replacement. The fact that we > can use some of the same structures and functions to help us implement it is > a bonus, but not a mandate to mess with the existing model. > That is a right point. I might be too far ahead of myself. :-) > Isn't Linux already handling PCI-PCI bridges and multiple PCI channles fine > already, or has our autoconfig code exposed some existing non-arch-specific > weakness? > I think on PCs, P2P still largely depends on BIOS. (Correct me if I am wrong). There are some post-scan_bus() mechanism to setup P2P bridges. I have not looked into it closely. Jun