Linux PCI subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kunihiko Hayashi <hayashi.kunihiko@socionext.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc: "Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	"Rob Herring" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	"Lorenzo Pieralisi" <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
	"Krzysztof Wilczyński" <kw@linux.com>,
	"Masami Hiramatsu" <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] PCI: uniphier-ep: Add support for non-legacy SoC
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2022 20:11:45 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <664a23d0-7646-3c50-fe4d-d29b6ce99a35@socionext.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220204160616.GA183849@bhelgaas>

Hi Bjorn,

Thank you for your comment.

On 2022/02/05 1:06, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 03, 2022 at 11:36:25AM +0900, Kunihiko Hayashi wrote:
>> Define SoC data that includes pci_epc_features and boolean 'is_legacy'
>> to distinguish between legacy SoC (ex. Pro5) and non-legacy SoC.
> 
> I'm not a big fan of "legacy" as a description because it conveys very
> little information.  You're adding support for a "non-legacy" SoC, so
> now there are "legacy" ones and "non-legacy" ones.  Next year there
> will be another new SoC, and then there will be *two* kinds of
> "legacy" ones that must be distinguished plus the next "non-legacy"
> one.

Make sense. There will be multiple different "legacy", so it isn't
desirable to distinguish SoCs by legacy and non-legacy.

> You mentioned "Pro5" as an example of "legacy," which is a good start.
> Are there any others?  If Pro5 is the only one, you could just use
> "pro5" where you now use "legacy."
I see. In consideration of the future, I'll define callback functions
and prepare functions for each SoC.
And the "gio" clocks/resets are distinguished by the flag "has_gio".

Thank you,

---
Best Regards
Kunihiko Hayashi

  reply	other threads:[~2022-02-08 11:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-02-03  2:36 [PATCH 0/3] PCI: Introduce UniPhier NX1 PCI endpoint controller support Kunihiko Hayashi
2022-02-03  2:36 ` [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: PCI: uniphier-ep: Add bindings for NX1 SoC Kunihiko Hayashi
2022-02-03 13:50   ` Rob Herring
2022-02-04  4:22     ` Kunihiko Hayashi
2022-02-03  2:36 ` [PATCH 2/3] PCI: uniphier-ep: Add support for non-legacy SoC Kunihiko Hayashi
2022-02-04 16:06   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2022-02-08 11:11     ` Kunihiko Hayashi [this message]
2022-02-03  2:36 ` [PATCH 3/3] PCI: uniphier-ep: Add compatible string and SoC-dependent data for NX1 SoC Kunihiko Hayashi

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=664a23d0-7646-3c50-fe4d-d29b6ce99a35@socionext.com \
    --to=hayashi.kunihiko@socionext.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=kw@linux.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
    --cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
    --cc=robh+dt@kernel.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