From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-ID: <17491.6735.199209.247913@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 17:48:31 +1000 From: Paul Mackerras To: linas@austin.ibm.com (Linas Vepstas) Subject: Re: PCI init vs. memory init In-Reply-To: <20060428230401.GF22621@austin.ibm.com> References: <20060428230401.GF22621@austin.ibm.com> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Linas Vepstas writes: > You mentioned that the sequence of inits seemed wrong, that the > PCI init should be done later, after the memory init. I think > I agree; but when I took a very very quick look at the code, there > was no obvious hook in later init to move the PCI init over to. > > Are you pursuing this further? Should I dig into it? Any bright > ideas? Am I missing something obvious? I assume you're talking about find_and_init_phbs() and eeh_init(), which are currently called from pSeries_setup_arch(). Would a core_initcall be early enough for those? It seems to me that it probably would be. What are the actual dependencies? Clearly it needs to be before pcibios_init(), which is a subsys_initcall. Is there anything else that they need to come before? > There are several spots in in the powerpc PCI init code where > a boot_mem alloc is used instead of kmalloc, and this boot_mem is > then hacked around in the case of a PCI hotplug remove. It would > be nice to fix this... Indeed. Paul.