From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: <1367721709.11982.37.camel@pasglop> Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/3] of/pci: Unify pci_process_bridge_OF_ranges from Microblaze and PowerPC From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Andrew Murray Date: Sun, 05 May 2013 12:41:49 +1000 In-Reply-To: <1366627295-16964-2-git-send-email-Andrew.Murray@arm.com> References: <1366627295-16964-1-git-send-email-Andrew.Murray@arm.com> <1366627295-16964-2-git-send-email-Andrew.Murray@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, siva.kallam@samsung.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linus.walleij@linaro.org, thierry.reding@avionic-design.de, Liviu.Dudau@arm.com, juhosg@openwrt.org, paulus@samba.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, jg1.han@samsung.com, jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com, thomas.abraham@linaro.org, grant.likely@linaro.org, Rob Herring , arnd@arndb.de, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, kgene.kim@samsung.com, bhelgaas@google.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com, monstr@monstr.eu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, suren.reddy@samsung.com, linuxppc-dev List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, 2013-04-22 at 11:41 +0100, Andrew Murray wrote: > The pci_process_bridge_OF_ranges function, used to parse the "ranges" > property of a PCI host device, is found in both Microblaze and PowerPC > architectures. These implementations are nearly identical. This patch > moves this common code to a common place. What's happening with this ? I'd like to avoid that patch for now as I'm doing some changes to pci_process_bridge_OF_ranges which are fairly urgent (I might even stick them in the current merge window) to deal with memory windows having separate offsets. There's also a few hacks in there that are really ppc specific... I think the right long term approach is to change the way powerpc (and microblaze ?) initializes PCI host bridges. Move it away from setup_arch() (which is a PITA anyway since it's way too early) to an early init call of some sort, and encapsulate the new struct pci_host_bridge. We can then directly configure the host bridge windows rather than having this "intermediary" set of resources in our pci_controller and in fact move most of the fields from pci_controller to pci_host_bridge to the point where the former can remain as a simple platform specific wrapper if needed. So for new stuff (hint: DT based ARM PCI) or stuff that has to deal with a lot less archaic platforms (hint: Microblaze), I'd recommend going straight for that approach rather than perpetuating the PowerPC code which I'll try to deal with in the next few monthes. Cheers, Ben.