From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Subject: Re: Proposal to move PCI out of arch/powerpc and into drivers/of Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Kumar Gala In-Reply-To: <27bab769-0788-4b48-96a7-ced65e40144c@SG2EHSMHS007.ehs.local> Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 17:50:26 -0600 Message-Id: References: <27bab769-0788-4b48-96a7-ced65e40144c@SG2EHSMHS007.ehs.local> To: John Linn Cc: devicetree-discuss@ozlabs.org, michal.simek@petalogix.com, microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, John Williams List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Feb 26, 2010, at 5:07 PM, John Linn wrote: > Hi all, >=20 > We are in the process of putting PCI/PCIe into the microblaze > architecture. =20 >=20 > In order to not duplicate/fork the PCI code in Powerpc, we're = proposing > to move the PCI code from arch/powerpc into drivers/of such that it > would be common code for Powerpc and MicroBlaze. >=20 > This would be the 1st part of a refactoring that would occur with the > PCI code. >=20 > Ben H., would you mind if that happened (move arch/powerpc/kernel/pci* > to drivers/of/*)? >=20 > Thanks, > John John, Does MicroBlaze firmware produce full OF style PCI device tree's or do = what we do on embedded systems and just have the root and leave the = probing to the kernel? I haven't looked at the OF side of what we do in = PPC in a while but I know we have some major differences between PPC32 & = PPC64 because of assumptions about what the firmware provides (or = doesnt). As well as features on the PPC64 side to not re-probe PCI and build = internal kernel data structures purely from the OF tree. I think moving the code and sharing it between everyone is a good thing, = just point out some issues I know we are aware of. - k=