From: Don Dutile <ddutile@redhat.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Cc: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Myron Stowe <mstowe@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pci, rename subordinate bus to secondary bus
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 11:01:50 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5025225E.6000008@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAErSpo6sFdQSObsRLdyNPcrqhONMcjbjcbAR0xyGa-z0Pex-iQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 08/03/2012 12:17 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 6:49 AM, Prarit Bhargava<prarit@redhat.com> wrote:
>> The PCI-to-PCI Bridge Architecture Specification defines a secondary
>> interface (commonly known as a secondary bus) as "The PCI interface of the
>> bridge that is connected to the PCI bus farthest from the CPU is referred
>> to as the secondary PCI interface."
>>
>> The term subordinate bus number is used to define "the bus number of the
>> highest numbered PCI bus segment which is behind (or subordinate to) the
>> bridge".
>>
>> The current code tree mixes up these terms such that pci_dev->subordinate
>> is really the secondary interface. This gets confusing as other areas
>> of the code use proper terminology for subordinate and secondary.
>>
>> This is a cleanup that renames pci_dev->subordinate to pci_dev->secondary,
>> and cleans up some comments referring to the secondary and subordinate
>> busses.
>
> I think this or something similar might be worthwhile eventually, but
> I'm not sure we're quite ready yet. I hesitate because this feels
> like one small piece of PCI namespace cleanup, and I think it would be
> good to settle on a plan for a more extensive reorganization that we
> could do all at once. I don't think it's obvious yet what that would
> look like. This might be one part, collecting P2P bridge-related
> things into one place (they're currently scattered around pci_dev and
> pci_bus), giving busn_res a better name might be another, etc.
>
+1.
pci-dev could stand a good cleaning up, so if we're going to churn
pci-dev users/consumers, we ought to roll this into a larger cleanup.
Maybe we can hash some of this out at PCI mini-summit.
> Also, I think this specific change would affect all architectures, and
> this patch only fixes x86.
>
yup.
> When we're ready to do this, I wonder if it could be done completely
> mechanically by Coccinelle? If it could, that would be a nice way of
> encapsulating the effort so the patch doesn't bit-rot.
>
oh; /me looks up Coccinelle ...
>> arch/x86/pci/fixup.c | 3 ++-
>> arch/x86/pci/sta2x11-fixup.c | 4 ++--
>> drivers/acpi/pci_bind.c | 12 ++++++------
>> drivers/acpi/pci_root.c | 4 ++--
>> drivers/acpi/pci_slot.c | 6 +++---
>> drivers/infiniband/hw/mthca/mthca_reset.c | 2 +-
>> drivers/iommu/dmar.c | 6 +++---
>> drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c | 18 +++++++++---------
>> drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/tg3.c | 16 ++++++++--------
>> drivers/pci/bus.c | 14 +++++++-------
>> drivers/pci/hotplug-pci.c | 2 +-
>> drivers/pci/hotplug/acpiphp_glue.c | 26 +++++++++++++-------------
>> drivers/pci/hotplug/cpcihp_generic.c | 2 +-
>> drivers/pci/hotplug/cpcihp_zt5550.c | 2 +-
>> drivers/pci/hotplug/cpqphp_core.c | 2 +-
>> drivers/pci/hotplug/cpqphp_pci.c | 2 +-
>> drivers/pci/hotplug/ibmphp_core.c | 2 +-
>> drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_core.c | 6 +++---
>> drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_ctrl.c | 6 +++---
>> drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_hpc.c | 4 ++--
>> drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_pci.c | 4 ++--
>> drivers/pci/hotplug/pcihp_slot.c | 6 +++---
>> drivers/pci/hotplug/rpadlpar_core.c | 4 ++--
>> drivers/pci/hotplug/sgi_hotplug.c | 14 +++++++-------
>> drivers/pci/hotplug/shpchp_core.c | 6 +++---
>> drivers/pci/hotplug/shpchp_ctrl.c | 4 ++--
>> drivers/pci/hotplug/shpchp_hpc.c | 4 ++--
>> drivers/pci/hotplug/shpchp_pci.c | 4 ++--
>> drivers/pci/hotplug/shpchp_sysfs.c | 2 +-
>> drivers/pci/pci-acpi.c | 4 ++--
>> drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c | 16 ++++++++--------
>> drivers/pci/pci.c | 10 +++++-----
>> drivers/pci/pci.h | 2 +-
>> drivers/pci/pcie/aer/aerdrv.c | 4 ++--
>> drivers/pci/pcie/aer/aerdrv_core.c | 11 ++++++-----
>> drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c | 18 +++++++++---------
>> drivers/pci/pcie/pme.c | 8 ++++----
>> drivers/pci/pcie/portdrv_pci.c | 6 +++---
>> drivers/pci/probe.c | 4 ++--
>> drivers/pci/quirks.c | 27 ++++++++++++---------------
>> drivers/pci/remove.c | 22 +++++++++++-----------
>> drivers/pci/setup-bus.c | 26 +++++++++++++-------------
>> drivers/pcmcia/cardbus.c | 6 +++---
>> drivers/pcmcia/yenta_socket.c | 22 +++++++++++++---------
>> drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-laptop.c | 2 +-
>> include/linux/pci.h | 2 +-
>> 46 files changed, 190 insertions(+), 187 deletions(-)
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-10 15:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-03 12:49 [PATCH] pci, rename subordinate bus to secondary bus Prarit Bhargava
2012-08-03 16:17 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2012-08-10 15:01 ` Don Dutile [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=5025225E.6000008@redhat.com \
--to=ddutile@redhat.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mstowe@redhat.com \
--cc=prarit@redhat.com \
/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).