From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 407CDB70D2 for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2010 04:40:34 +1000 (EST) Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mpc85xx_edac: change to use new definitions for PCI EDAC regspace Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Kumar Gala In-Reply-To: <20100722132548.6eef941b@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net> Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 13:40:19 -0500 Message-Id: <95F6CFEA-DC74-4CF6-A195-4CBFABAAB7F0@kernel.crashing.org> References: <1279756992-29543-1-git-send-email-dbaryshkov@gmail.com> <1279756992-29543-2-git-send-email-dbaryshkov@gmail.com> <566EC982-1CDA-4806-8EC0-8C9F36448F83@kernel.crashing.org> <20100722132548.6eef941b@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net> To: Scott Wood Cc: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, bluesmoke-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Doug Thompson List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Jul 22, 2010, at 1:25 PM, Scott Wood wrote: > On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 20:48:15 +0400 > Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote: >=20 >> Hello, >>=20 >> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 7:38 PM, Kumar Gala = wrote: >>>=20 >>> On Jul 21, 2010, at 7:03 PM, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote: >>>=20 >>>> Currently (as mpc8540-pci) devices are not created on of_platform = bus, >>>> mpc85xx_edac can't probe to them. Follow the change to dts trees to = bind >>>> not to the main mpc8540-pci node but to special mpc85xx-pci-error = nodes, >>>> present on soc bus. >>>>=20 >>>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov >>>> --- >>>> drivers/edac/mpc85xx_edac.c | 18 +++++++++--------- >>>> 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) >>>=20 >>> Nak. >>>=20 >>> We already have a node in the dts for the PCI controller. Lets = update the platform code to add the pci controller to the = of_platform_bus_probe list. >>=20 >> I've had that idea. However it's really look strange to me to call >> of_platform_bus_probe() on the bus node, for which we (IMO) = explicitly >> won't like for >> child devices (PCI devices) to be added to of_platform bus. >=20 > Right, and it's also not great for a driver for one aspect of PCI to > claim to be the driver for the whole thing. >=20 > But changing the device tree because of this Linux-internal concern is > also not good. >=20 > How about keeping the error stuff as a separate device from Linux's > perspective, but have the main Freescale PCI code create it as a > platform device instead of putting it in the device tree? I'd be good with that solution. - k=