From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752299AbbARMeF (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Jan 2015 07:34:05 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:39186 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751412AbbARMeC (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Jan 2015 07:34:02 -0500 Message-ID: <54BBA7D7.2000804@redhat.com> Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2015 07:32:23 -0500 From: Jon Masters Organization: Red Hat, Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Graeme Gregory , Hanjun Guo CC: Mark Rutland , "linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org" , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , "wangyijing@huawei.com" , Rob Herring , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Timur Tabi , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "grant.likely@linaro.org" , Charles Garcia-Tobin , "phoenix.liyi@huawei.com" , Robert Richter , Jason Cooper , Arnd Bergmann , Marc Zyngier , Mark Brown , Bjorn Helgaas , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "graeme.gregory@linaro.org" , Randy Dunlap , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com" , Sudeep Holla , Olof Johansson Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 06/17] ARM64 / ACPI: Make PCI optional for ACPI on ARM64 References: <1421247905-3749-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> <1421247905-3749-7-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> <20150116094913.GA13634@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <54BB51F1.8000900@linaro.org> <508480149.12941388.1421562696311.JavaMail.zimbra@zmail15.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> <54BB56CB.7040701@linaro.org> <20150118092955.GE6182@xora-haswell.xora.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20150118092955.GE6182@xora-haswell.xora.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/18/2015 04:29 AM, Graeme Gregory wrote: > On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 02:46:35PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote: >> On 2015年01月18日 14:31, Jon Masters wrote: >>> Hi Folks, >>> >>> Sorry for top posting from bed. The mainstream servers will all likely do >>> PCIe but there are several that may not. They should not be excluded. That >> said, >>> if we booted a previously built kernel on a system without an MCFG and >>> got no ECAM/root then things would probably still work. >>> >>> I think it'll work out either way but for the record there is no requirement to do PCIe on ARM servers that conform to spec. >> >> OK, Catalin already said that was not the main point of the >> comments for this patch, I think the title and change log >> of the patch is inconsistent with the code makes Catalin confused, >> I will update them in next version. >> > Well what we are talking about is the presence of CONFIG_PCI=y which even > in Jons case will be true as he wants to run the same kernel on both > sets of hardware. Yup. And btw, the ACPI+PCI use case works beautifully already today. I will followup to my other Tested-by with a bit more detail later, but these patches have successfully been used on a wide range of PCIe based hardware already (I personally have tried a number of 10G network cards, SATA, USB, and even a graphics card or two for giggles). Jon.