From: Rojhalat Ibrahim <imr@rtschenk.de>
To: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
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: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 09:21:24 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7706620.VNI3PE9pqO@pcimr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1371073826.18413.52@snotra>
On Wednesday 12 June 2013 16:50:26 Scott Wood wrote:
> 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
> >
> > 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
> >
> > should
> >
> > > be moved into the booke/86xx ifdef to avoid an unused function
> >
> > warning.
> >
> > > -Scott
> >
> > How about this patch? It uses setup_indirect_pci for the PCI case in
> > mpc83xx_add_bridge. Additionally it adds a check in
> > 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
> change the 83xx call back to setup_indirect_pci. I see that 85xx is
> also callirng fsl_setup_indirect_pci for both; it'd be good to be
> consistent.
>
> In any case, can you send a proper patch with a signoff and commit
> message?
>
> -Scott
Where is it called for 85xx? As far as I can tell fsl_setup_indirect_pci is
called exactly once in fsl_add_bridge and nowhere else (after applying the
proposed patch).
For 83xx the decision between PCI and PCIe has already been made at
the point where the setup function is called. So IMO it doesn't make sense
to call fsl_setup_indirect_pci and do the check again. Moreover PCIe on 83xx
uses a completely different set of functions.
I'll send the proper patch in a separate mail.
Rojhalat
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-13 7:21 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
2013-06-13 7:21 ` Rojhalat Ibrahim [this message]
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=7706620.VNI3PE9pqO@pcimr \
--to=imr@rtschenk.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=michael.guntsche@it-loops.com \
--cc=scottwood@freescale.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).