Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] PCI: dwc: Add dbi_phys_addr and atu_phys_addr to struct dw_pcie

[Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>]

On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 07:27:18PM -0700, Prudhvi Yarlagadda wrote:
> Both DBI and ATU physical base addresses are needed by pcie_qcom.c
> driver to program the location of DBI and ATU blocks in Qualcomm
> PCIe Controller specific PARF hardware block.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Prudhvi Yarlagadda <quic_pyarlaga@quicinc.com>
> Reviewed-by: Mayank Rana <quic_mrana@quicinc.com>
> ---
>  drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c | 2 ++
>  drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h | 2 ++
>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c
> index 1b5aba1f0c92..bc3a5d6b0177 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c
> @@ -112,6 +112,7 @@ int dw_pcie_get_resources(struct dw_pcie *pci)
>  		pci->dbi_base = devm_pci_remap_cfg_resource(pci->dev, res);
>  		if (IS_ERR(pci->dbi_base))
>  			return PTR_ERR(pci->dbi_base);
> +		pci->dbi_phys_addr = res->start;
>  	}
>  
>  	/* DBI2 is mainly useful for the endpoint controller */
> @@ -134,6 +135,7 @@ int dw_pcie_get_resources(struct dw_pcie *pci)
>  			pci->atu_base = devm_ioremap_resource(pci->dev, res);
>  			if (IS_ERR(pci->atu_base))
>  				return PTR_ERR(pci->atu_base);
> +			pci->atu_phys_addr = res->start;
>  		} else {
>  			pci->atu_base = pci->dbi_base + DEFAULT_DBI_ATU_OFFSET;
>  		}
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h
> index 53c4c8f399c8..efc72989330c 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h
> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h
> @@ -407,8 +407,10 @@ struct dw_pcie_ops {
>  struct dw_pcie {
>  	struct device		*dev;
>  	void __iomem		*dbi_base;
> +	phys_addr_t		dbi_phys_addr;
>  	void __iomem		*dbi_base2;
>  	void __iomem		*atu_base;
> +	phys_addr_t		atu_phys_addr;
>  	size_t			atu_size;
>  	u32			num_ib_windows;
>  	u32			num_ob_windows;

This patch is pretty trivial and it doesn't show anything to justify
the need to keep these addresses.  I think this should be squashed
with the next patch that actually *uses* them.