linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH v8 1/3] of/pci: Unify pci_process_bridge_OF_ranges from Micro

To: Andrew Murray <Andrew.Murray@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/3] of/pci: Unify pci_process_bridge_OF_ranges from Microblaze and PowerPC
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Date: Sun, 05 May 2013 12:41:49 +1000
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>, jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, siva.kallam@samsung.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, jg1.han@samsung.com, Liviu.Dudau@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, kgene.kim@samsung.com, bhelgaas@google.com, suren.reddy@samsung.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, monstr@monstr.eu, paulus@samba.org, thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com, thierry.reding@avionic-design.de, thomas.abraham@linaro.org, arnd@arndb.de, linus.walleij@linaro.org, juhosg@openwrt.org, grant.likely@linaro.org, Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com>
In-reply-to: <1366627295-16964-2-git-send-email-Andrew.Murray@arm.com>
List-archive: <http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/>
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?Subject=help>
List-id: linux-mips <linux-mips.eddie.linux-mips.org>
List-owner: <mailto:ralf@linux-mips.org>
List-post: <mailto:linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-subscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=subscribe%20linux-mips>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=unsubscribe%20linux-mips>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <1366627295-16964-1-git-send-email-Andrew.Murray@arm.com> <1366627295-16964-2-git-send-email-Andrew.Murray@arm.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
On Mon, 2013-04-22 at 11:41 +0100, Andrew Murray wrote:
> The pci_process_bridge_OF_ranges function, used to parse the "ranges"
> property of a PCI host device, is found in both Microblaze and PowerPC
> architectures. These implementations are nearly identical. This patch
> moves this common code to a common place.

What's happening with this ? I'd like to avoid that patch for now
as I'm doing some changes to pci_process_bridge_OF_ranges
which are fairly urgent (I might even stick them in the current
merge window) to deal with memory windows having separate offsets.

There's also a few hacks in there that are really ppc specific...

I think the right long term approach is to change the way powerpc
(and microblaze ?) initializes PCI host bridges. Move it away from
setup_arch() (which is a PITA anyway since it's way too early) to
an early init call of some sort, and encapsulate the new struct
pci_host_bridge.

We can then directly configure the host bridge windows rather
than having this "intermediary" set of resources in our pci_controller
and in fact move most of the fields from pci_controller to
pci_host_bridge to the point where the former can remain as a
simple platform specific wrapper if needed.

So for new stuff (hint: DT based ARM PCI) or stuff that has to deal with
a lot less archaic platforms (hint: Microblaze), I'd recommend going
straight for that approach rather than perpetuating the PowerPC code
which I'll try to deal with in the next few monthes.

Cheers,
Ben.
 


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>