Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] pci, acpi: Match PCI config space accessors against platfrom specific ECAM quirks.

Tomasz Nowicki
2016-06-02T13:35:42Z

On 02.06.2016 14:32, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday, June 2, 2016 2:07:43 PM CEST Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
>> On 02.06.2016 13:42, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>> On Thursday, June 2, 2016 10:41:01 AM CEST Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
>>>> +struct pci_ecam_ops *pci_mcfg_get_ops(struct acpi_pci_root *root)
>>>> +{
>>>> + int bus_num = root->secondary.start;
>>>> + int domain = root->segment;
>>>> + struct pci_cfg_fixup *f;
>>>> +
>>>> + if (!mcfg_table)
>>>> + return &pci_generic_ecam_ops;
>>>> +
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * Match against platform specific quirks and return corresponding
>>>> + * CAM ops.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * First match against PCI topology <domain:bus> then use OEM ID and
>>>> + * OEM revision from MCFG table standard header.
>>>> + */
>>>> + for (f = __start_acpi_mcfg_fixups; f < __end_acpi_mcfg_fixups; f++) {
>>>> + if ((f->domain == domain || f->domain == PCI_MCFG_DOMAIN_ANY) &&
>>>> + (f->bus_num == bus_num || f->bus_num == PCI_MCFG_BUS_ANY) &&
>>>> + (!strncmp(f->oem_id, mcfg_table->header.oem_id,
>>>> + ACPI_OEM_ID_SIZE)) &&
>>>> + (f->oem_revision == mcfg_table->header.oem_revision))
>>>> + return f->ops;
>>>> + }
>>>> + /* No quirks, use ECAM */
>>>> + return &pci_generic_ecam_ops;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> int pci_mcfg_lookup(struct acpi_pci_root *root)
>>>
>>> Can you explain the use of pci_ecam_ops instead of pci_ops here?
>>>
>>
>> I wanted to get associated bus_shift and use it to setup configuration
>> region properly before calling pci_ecam_create. Please see next patch.
>>
>
> I see. It feels really odd to do it this way though, since having a
> nonstandard bus_shift essentially means not using anything resembling
> ECAM to start with.
>
> I realize that a lot of the host bridges are not ECAM, but because
> of this, it would be more logical to have their own pci_ops instead
> of pci_ecam_ops.

Well, we have bus_shift there to express bus shift differentiation. So I
would say we should change just structure name to prevent misunderstanding.

Thanks,
Tomasz