From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
To: Rojhalat Ibrahim <imr@rtschenk.de>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Michael Guntsche <michael.guntsche@it-loops.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] PCI related panic on powerpc based board with 3.10-rcX
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 16:50:26 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1371073826.18413.52@snotra> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <34279395.MbRViMjbAR@pcimr> (from imr@rtschenk.de on Wed Jun 12 03:19:30 2013)
On 06/12/2013 03:19:30 AM, Rojhalat Ibrahim wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 June 2013 12:28:59 Scott Wood wrote:
> > Yes, I figured it was non-PCIe because the code change that you said
> > helped was on the non-PCIe branch of the if/else. Generally it's =20
> good
> > to explicitly mention the chip you're using, though.
> >
> > fsl_setup_indirect_pci should be renamed to fsl_setup_indirect_pcie.
> > Your patch above should be applied, and fsl_setup_indirect_pcie =20
> should
> > be moved into the booke/86xx ifdef to avoid an unused function =20
> warning.
> >
> > -Scott
>=20
> How about this patch? It uses setup_indirect_pci for the PCI case in
> mpc83xx_add_bridge. Additionally it adds a check in =20
> fsl_setup_indirect_pci
> to only use the modified read function in case of PCIe.
If we're adding the check to fsl_setup_indirect_pci, there's no need to =20
change the 83xx call back to setup_indirect_pci. I see that 85xx is =20
also callirng fsl_setup_indirect_pci for both; it'd be good to be =20
consistent.
In any case, can you send a proper patch with a signoff and commit =20
message?
-Scott=
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-12 21:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-08 19:39 [BUG] PCI related panic on powerpc based board with 3.10-rcX Michael Guntsche
2013-06-10 11:41 ` Rojhalat Ibrahim
2013-06-10 17:07 ` Michael Guntsche
2013-06-10 22:52 ` Scott Wood
2013-06-11 7:24 ` Rojhalat Ibrahim
2013-06-11 17:00 ` Scott Wood
2013-06-11 17:09 ` Michael Guntsche
2013-06-11 17:28 ` Scott Wood
2013-06-12 8:19 ` Rojhalat Ibrahim
2013-06-12 21:50 ` Scott Wood [this message]
2013-06-13 7:21 ` Rojhalat Ibrahim
2013-06-13 16:49 ` Scott Wood
2013-06-14 7:55 ` Rojhalat Ibrahim
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-06-08 17:30 Michael Guntsche
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=1371073826.18413.52@snotra \
--to=scottwood@freescale.com \
--cc=imr@rtschenk.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=michael.guntsche@it-loops.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).