Re: [PATCH v3 00/22] PCI: Iterate pci host bridge instead of pci root bus

[Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@huawei.com>]

On 2013-2-7 7:02, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
>> On Wednesday, February 06, 2013 01:53:50 PM Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, February 06, 2013 01:28:27 PM Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>>>> so you still did not answer you want 1 or 2 yet:
>>>>>
>>>>> for sgi_hotplug,
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. still keep the module support, and register acpi_pci_driver later.
>>>>> 2. built-in support only, and need to register acpi_pci_driver early.
>>>>
>>>> Please work with the assumption that acpi_pci_driver is not going to be there
>>>> any more.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think I could change ioapic and iommu hotplug to weak add/remove because they
>>> should be built-in by nature.
>>>
>>> but how about others like sgi_hotplug etc?
> 
> I think that could be handled with pcibios_root_bridge_prepare() or
> something similar -- something that happens in the "add host bridge"
> path.  I'm not saying we necessarily have all the right hooks in place
> yet.  It's just that I'd rather figure out what the right hooks *are*
> and add them if necessary, than just convert pci_root_buses to
> for_each_pci_host_bridge().
> 
>> I'd really prefer to wait for the patchset removing acpi_pci_driver (from
>> Myron) before proceeding with more changes in that area.
>>
>> Myron, do you have a prototype based on the current linux-next?
> 
> I think it's really the acpiphp/pciehp issue that's holding up the
> removal of acpi_pci_driver.  I'm not sure if anybody's working on
> that.
Hi Bjorn,
	I'm working on this topic, but a little busy with other stuff
in last few days. I guess I could should out a version in coming days.
	Thanks!

> 
> .
>