From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thierry Reding Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/4] ARM: tegra: pcie: Add tegra3 support Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 21:50:29 +0200 Message-ID: <20130610195028.GB25859@mithrandir> References: <1370372252-4332-1-git-send-email-jagarwal@nvidia.com> <1370372252-4332-2-git-send-email-jagarwal@nvidia.com> <51AE3D3B.6080102@wwwdotorg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="H1spWtNR+x+ondvy" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51AE3D3B.6080102@wwwdotorg.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Warren Cc: Jay Agarwal , linux@arm.linux.org.uk, bhelgaas@google.com, ldewangan@nvidia.com, olof@lixom.net, hdoyu@nvidia.com, pgaikwad@nvidia.com, mturquette@linaro.org, pdeschrijver@nvidia.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, jtukkinen@nvidia.com, kthota@nvidia.com List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org --H1spWtNR+x+ondvy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 01:17:15PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 06/04/2013 12:57 PM, Jay Agarwal wrote: [...] > > struct tegra_pcie_port { > > @@ -384,7 +408,7 @@ static int tegra_pcie_read_conf(struct pci_bus *bus= , unsigned int devfn, > > struct tegra_pcie_port *port; > > =20 > > list_for_each_entry(port, &pcie->ports, list) { > > - if (port->index + 1 =3D=3D slot) { > > + if (port->index =3D=3D slot) { >=20 > This and the equivalent change in tegra_pcie_write_conf() seem like a > bug-fix unrelated to the addition of Tegra30 support. Hence, they should > be a separate patch. What exactly is this change supposed to fix? The description doesn't provide any details about why this is required. Furthermore this was done on purpose to model the Tegra PCIe controller according to what typical Linux systems provide. Device 0:00.0 is usually the root complex, and device 0:01.0, 0:02.0 etc are the root ports. The change proposed above makes 0:00.0 the first root port, therefore breaking what systems usually expect. Thierry --H1spWtNR+x+ondvy Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJRti4EAAoJEN0jrNd/PrOheKEP/2YMzqZVmy1qIqpFkajuHvxE pWNb91OOFiWW73fBrRtu5krgL9u8qG+K6qta55DqgwZCCldanEq0vESaQ/U1thVk vOtuzbV7jY1afQmdbeM/Cj5/+BdZcZ4Zrpj/pD5EDz9cBaW/OW5AHitUwMQj6r7x kHHGlT39Fg7TlU/b+CFOGqSQF0MMURPa2M0nRLvJ+pryahAg1NHrJeMvXSVwONX7 QtSEljXjp2/iOMjb+INJoQjep7lJnBSrpk82RkNhzl4oCY0iaZXUNwoYjKRd0rwH fdVoJFaWtWAnfRdMcRl3Lkt06O1rIC4qOi5M17LXYrp1Y5RIskGb6RbmvxbPUTg5 QFPjh4wltNyva6swErkMWYXmUw/GcSnjUktJLR6SYEH7tGAzxArkJWdp3c+T7vsE QhFgphWA160/6anrLSrSQqrFIE/JLxxd760kf6QF4DMXTeuulwXgda++y3KPJkVm 3arbv0ZknrRqNLrhpKG1EdUoPpWMGUUFkxwa7UrOtV6QQeNJCkLHvFdrINRKbJtk eJY4qHnijlTbI8Xs7Hlt3SQAPkcPw4MHDh0a2+qcGas6MdO1wQzXvTtDVFNoXJUt poos8renfcJ1hpwmmLWHnl1ehO5yD/lexhrqMErdxP0BDThUzPiXxx7Dl9npvad2 IZz8+5uClV99qR/Z92Fq =A5ws -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --H1spWtNR+x+ondvy--