Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the pci tree got a conflict in:
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/snps,dw-pcie.yaml
between commit:
5c3741492d2e ("dt-bindings: PCI: tegra234: Add ECAM support")
from the arm-soc tree and commit:
4cc13eedb892 ("dt-bindings: PCI: dwc: Add reg/reg-names common properties")
from the pci tree.
I didn't know how to fix this up, so I just used the latter (and so lost
the addition of "ecam").
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 09:57:38AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the pci tree got a conflict in:
>
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/snps,dw-pcie.yaml
>
> between commit:
>
> 5c3741492d2e ("dt-bindings: PCI: tegra234: Add ECAM support")
>
> from the arm-soc tree and commit:
>
> 4cc13eedb892 ("dt-bindings: PCI: dwc: Add reg/reg-names common properties")
>
> from the pci tree.
>
> I didn't know how to fix this up, so I just used the latter (and so lost
> the addition of "ecam").
Did I miss a suggested resolution for this?
On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 10:21:03AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 09:57:38AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the pci tree got a conflict in:
> >
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/snps,dw-pcie.yaml
> >
> > between commit:
> >
> > 5c3741492d2e ("dt-bindings: PCI: tegra234: Add ECAM support")
> >
> > from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> >
> > 4cc13eedb892 ("dt-bindings: PCI: dwc: Add reg/reg-names common properties")
> >
> > from the pci tree.
> >
> > I didn't know how to fix this up, so I just used the latter (and so lost
> > the addition of "ecam").
>
> Did I miss a suggested resolution for this?
We had a brief discussion about this in another thread. So basically
Stephen's resolution is fine here and the plan is to instead add the
ECAM bits that the Tegra patch does in a separate patch on top of
Serge's patch. I should get around to sending that patch tomorrow.
Thierry
On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 05:48:53PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 10:21:03AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 09:57:38AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the pci tree got a conflict in:
> > >
> > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/snps,dw-pcie.yaml
> > >
> > > between commit:
> > >
> > > 5c3741492d2e ("dt-bindings: PCI: tegra234: Add ECAM support")
> > >
> > > from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> > >
> > > 4cc13eedb892 ("dt-bindings: PCI: dwc: Add reg/reg-names common properties")
> > >
> > > from the pci tree.
> > >
> > > I didn't know how to fix this up, so I just used the latter (and so lost
> > > the addition of "ecam").
> >
> > Did I miss a suggested resolution for this?
>
> We had a brief discussion about this in another thread. So basically
> Stephen's resolution is fine here and the plan is to instead add the
> ECAM bits that the Tegra patch does in a separate patch on top of
> Serge's patch. I should get around to sending that patch tomorrow.
>
> Thierry
Actually the discussion still goes. I haven't got a respond to my
last suggestion which seems to me more reasonable than extending the
DT-bindings with another vendor-specific reg-name. @Bjorn, please join
the discussion here:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/[email protected]/
-Sergey
On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 10:03:10PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 05:48:53PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 10:21:03AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 09:57:38AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > Today's linux-next merge of the pci tree got a conflict in:
> > > >
> > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/snps,dw-pcie.yaml
> > > >
> > > > between commit:
> > > >
> > > > 5c3741492d2e ("dt-bindings: PCI: tegra234: Add ECAM support")
> > > >
> > > > from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> > > >
> > > > 4cc13eedb892 ("dt-bindings: PCI: dwc: Add reg/reg-names common properties")
> > > >
> > > > from the pci tree.
> > > >
> > > > I didn't know how to fix this up, so I just used the latter (and so lost
> > > > the addition of "ecam").
> > >
> > > Did I miss a suggested resolution for this?
> >
>
> > We had a brief discussion about this in another thread. So basically
> > Stephen's resolution is fine here and the plan is to instead add the
> > ECAM bits that the Tegra patch does in a separate patch on top of
> > Serge's patch. I should get around to sending that patch tomorrow.
> >
> > Thierry
>
> Actually the discussion still goes. I haven't got a respond to my
> last suggestion which seems to me more reasonable than extending the
> DT-bindings with another vendor-specific reg-name. @Bjorn, please join
> the discussion here:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/[email protected]/
Sorry, it's really too late for discussion. I need to send the v6.2
pull request today or at the very latest, tomorrow, so the only thing
to decide is how to resolve the merge conflict in the simplest
possible way. Unless there's a very compelling reason to resolve it
differently than Stephen did, that's going to be the answer.
Bjorn
On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 01:53:13PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 10:03:10PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 05:48:53PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 10:21:03AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 09:57:38AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the pci tree got a conflict in:
> > > > >
> > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/snps,dw-pcie.yaml
> > > > >
> > > > > between commit:
> > > > >
> > > > > 5c3741492d2e ("dt-bindings: PCI: tegra234: Add ECAM support")
> > > > >
> > > > > from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> > > > >
> > > > > 4cc13eedb892 ("dt-bindings: PCI: dwc: Add reg/reg-names common properties")
> > > > >
> > > > > from the pci tree.
> > > > >
> > > > > I didn't know how to fix this up, so I just used the latter (and so lost
> > > > > the addition of "ecam").
> > > >
> > > > Did I miss a suggested resolution for this?
> >
> > > We had a brief discussion about this in another thread. So basically
> > > Stephen's resolution is fine here and the plan is to instead add the
> > > ECAM bits that the Tegra patch does in a separate patch on top of
> > > Serge's patch. I should get around to sending that patch tomorrow.
> >
> > Actually the discussion still goes. I haven't got a respond to my
> > last suggestion which seems to me more reasonable than extending the
> > DT-bindings with another vendor-specific reg-name. @Bjorn, please join
> > the discussion here:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/[email protected]/
>
> Sorry, it's really too late for discussion. I need to send the v6.2
> pull request today or at the very latest, tomorrow, so the only thing
> to decide is how to resolve the merge conflict in the simplest
> possible way. Unless there's a very compelling reason to resolve it
> differently than Stephen did, that's going to be the answer.
To be more specific, the current answer is this (which is the same as
what's in next-20221213):
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/helgaas/pci.git/tree/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/snps,dw-pcie.yaml?id=f64171fdd171
If you think it needs to be different, please respond with a patch and
explanation.
Bjorn
On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 02:07:33PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 01:53:13PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 10:03:10PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 05:48:53PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 10:21:03AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 09:57:38AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the pci tree got a conflict in:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/snps,dw-pcie.yaml
> > > > > >
> > > > > > between commit:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 5c3741492d2e ("dt-bindings: PCI: tegra234: Add ECAM support")
> > > > > >
> > > > > > from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 4cc13eedb892 ("dt-bindings: PCI: dwc: Add reg/reg-names common properties")
> > > > > >
> > > > > > from the pci tree.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I didn't know how to fix this up, so I just used the latter (and so lost
> > > > > > the addition of "ecam").
> > > > >
> > > > > Did I miss a suggested resolution for this?
> > >
> > > > We had a brief discussion about this in another thread. So basically
> > > > Stephen's resolution is fine here and the plan is to instead add the
> > > > ECAM bits that the Tegra patch does in a separate patch on top of
> > > > Serge's patch. I should get around to sending that patch tomorrow.
> > >
> > > Actually the discussion still goes. I haven't got a respond to my
> > > last suggestion which seems to me more reasonable than extending the
> > > DT-bindings with another vendor-specific reg-name. @Bjorn, please join
> > > the discussion here:
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/[email protected]/
> >
> > Sorry, it's really too late for discussion. I need to send the v6.2
> > pull request today or at the very latest, tomorrow, so the only thing
> > to decide is how to resolve the merge conflict in the simplest
> > possible way. Unless there's a very compelling reason to resolve it
> > differently than Stephen did, that's going to be the answer.
Sigh... One more redundant vendor-specific name. I wish I was in the
Cc-list of the original series.
>
> To be more specific, the current answer is this (which is the same as
> what's in next-20221213):
>
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/helgaas/pci.git/tree/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/snps,dw-pcie.yaml?id=f64171fdd171
Thanks. I've got it from the @Stephen message. @Thierry will submit a
new patch with the same 'ecam'-names change rebased on top of the
updated DT-schema.
-Serge(y)
>
> If you think it needs to be different, please respond with a patch and
> explanation.
>
> Bjorn
>
On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 02:36:49AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 02:07:33PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 01:53:13PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 10:03:10PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 05:48:53PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 10:21:03AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > > > > On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 09:57:38AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the pci tree got a conflict in:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/snps,dw-pcie.yaml
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > between commit:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 5c3741492d2e ("dt-bindings: PCI: tegra234: Add ECAM support")
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 4cc13eedb892 ("dt-bindings: PCI: dwc: Add reg/reg-names common properties")
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > from the pci tree.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I didn't know how to fix this up, so I just used the latter (and so lost
> > > > > > > the addition of "ecam").
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Did I miss a suggested resolution for this?
> > > >
> > > > > We had a brief discussion about this in another thread. So basically
> > > > > Stephen's resolution is fine here and the plan is to instead add the
> > > > > ECAM bits that the Tegra patch does in a separate patch on top of
> > > > > Serge's patch. I should get around to sending that patch tomorrow.
> > > >
> > > > Actually the discussion still goes. I haven't got a respond to my
> > > > last suggestion which seems to me more reasonable than extending the
> > > > DT-bindings with another vendor-specific reg-name. @Bjorn, please join
> > > > the discussion here:
> > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/[email protected]/
> > >
>
> > > Sorry, it's really too late for discussion. I need to send the v6.2
> > > pull request today or at the very latest, tomorrow, so the only thing
> > > to decide is how to resolve the merge conflict in the simplest
> > > possible way. Unless there's a very compelling reason to resolve it
> > > differently than Stephen did, that's going to be the answer.
>
> Sigh... One more redundant vendor-specific name. I wish I was in the
> Cc-list of the original series.
>
> >
> > To be more specific, the current answer is this (which is the same as
> > what's in next-20221213):
> >
> > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/helgaas/pci.git/tree/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/snps,dw-pcie.yaml?id=f64171fdd171
>
> Thanks. I've got it from the @Stephen message. @Thierry will submit a
> new patch with the same 'ecam'-names change rebased on top of the
> updated DT-schema.
If Rob doesn't mind this being broken in linux-next for a few more days,
I can discuss this internally with our PCI and UEFI teams and find out
if your proposal could be made to work.
Thierry
On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 03:37:35PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 02:36:49AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 02:07:33PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 01:53:13PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 10:03:10PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 05:48:53PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 10:21:03AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 09:57:38AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the pci tree got a conflict in:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/snps,dw-pcie.yaml
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > between commit:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 5c3741492d2e ("dt-bindings: PCI: tegra234: Add ECAM support")
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 4cc13eedb892 ("dt-bindings: PCI: dwc: Add reg/reg-names common properties")
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > from the pci tree.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I didn't know how to fix this up, so I just used the latter (and so lost
> > > > > > > > the addition of "ecam").
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Did I miss a suggested resolution for this?
> > > > >
> > > > > > We had a brief discussion about this in another thread. So basically
> > > > > > Stephen's resolution is fine here and the plan is to instead add the
> > > > > > ECAM bits that the Tegra patch does in a separate patch on top of
> > > > > > Serge's patch. I should get around to sending that patch tomorrow.
> > > > >
> > > > > Actually the discussion still goes. I haven't got a respond to my
> > > > > last suggestion which seems to me more reasonable than extending the
> > > > > DT-bindings with another vendor-specific reg-name. @Bjorn, please join
> > > > > the discussion here:
> > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/[email protected]/
> > > >
> >
> > > > Sorry, it's really too late for discussion. I need to send the v6.2
> > > > pull request today or at the very latest, tomorrow, so the only thing
> > > > to decide is how to resolve the merge conflict in the simplest
> > > > possible way. Unless there's a very compelling reason to resolve it
> > > > differently than Stephen did, that's going to be the answer.
> >
> > Sigh... One more redundant vendor-specific name. I wish I was in the
> > Cc-list of the original series.
> >
> > >
> > > To be more specific, the current answer is this (which is the same as
> > > what's in next-20221213):
> > >
> > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/helgaas/pci.git/tree/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/snps,dw-pcie.yaml?id=f64171fdd171
> >
> > Thanks. I've got it from the @Stephen message. @Thierry will submit a
> > new patch with the same 'ecam'-names change rebased on top of the
> > updated DT-schema.
>
> If Rob doesn't mind this being broken in linux-next for a few more days,
> I can discuss this internally with our PCI and UEFI teams and find out
> if your proposal could be made to work.
That would be awesome if you managed to work with the already defined
'config' reg-name so the DT-schema would look a bit cleaner. Thanks
in advance.
-Serge(y)
>
> Thierry
On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 01:07:35AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 03:37:35PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 02:36:49AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 02:07:33PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 01:53:13PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 10:03:10PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 05:48:53PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 10:21:03AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 09:57:38AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the pci tree got a conflict in:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/snps,dw-pcie.yaml
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > between commit:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 5c3741492d2e ("dt-bindings: PCI: tegra234: Add ECAM support")
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 4cc13eedb892 ("dt-bindings: PCI: dwc: Add reg/reg-names common properties")
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > from the pci tree.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I didn't know how to fix this up, so I just used the latter (and so lost
> > > > > > > > > the addition of "ecam").
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Did I miss a suggested resolution for this?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > We had a brief discussion about this in another thread. So basically
> > > > > > > Stephen's resolution is fine here and the plan is to instead add the
> > > > > > > ECAM bits that the Tegra patch does in a separate patch on top of
> > > > > > > Serge's patch. I should get around to sending that patch tomorrow.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Actually the discussion still goes. I haven't got a respond to my
> > > > > > last suggestion which seems to me more reasonable than extending the
> > > > > > DT-bindings with another vendor-specific reg-name. @Bjorn, please join
> > > > > > the discussion here:
> > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/[email protected]/
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > Sorry, it's really too late for discussion. I need to send the v6.2
> > > > > pull request today or at the very latest, tomorrow, so the only thing
> > > > > to decide is how to resolve the merge conflict in the simplest
> > > > > possible way. Unless there's a very compelling reason to resolve it
> > > > > differently than Stephen did, that's going to be the answer.
> > >
> > > Sigh... One more redundant vendor-specific name. I wish I was in the
> > > Cc-list of the original series.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > To be more specific, the current answer is this (which is the same as
> > > > what's in next-20221213):
> > > >
> > > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/helgaas/pci.git/tree/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/snps,dw-pcie.yaml?id=f64171fdd171
> > >
> > > Thanks. I've got it from the @Stephen message. @Thierry will submit a
> > > new patch with the same 'ecam'-names change rebased on top of the
> > > updated DT-schema.
> >
>
> > If Rob doesn't mind this being broken in linux-next for a few more days,
> > I can discuss this internally with our PCI and UEFI teams and find out
> > if your proposal could be made to work.
>
> That would be awesome if you managed to work with the already defined
> 'config' reg-name so the DT-schema would look a bit cleaner. Thanks
> in advance.
Looks like Linus has now pulled this in and resolved the conflict
himself. I think there is some benefit in "ecam" being more specific
than "config" and with ECAM being a PCIe standard mapping, it doesn't
seem like it's worth overcomplicating things by overloading the meaning
of "config".
Thierry
On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 01:06:29PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 01:07:35AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 03:37:35PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 02:36:49AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 02:07:33PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 01:53:13PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 10:03:10PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 05:48:53PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 10:21:03AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 09:57:38AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the pci tree got a conflict in:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/snps,dw-pcie.yaml
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > between commit:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 5c3741492d2e ("dt-bindings: PCI: tegra234: Add ECAM support")
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 4cc13eedb892 ("dt-bindings: PCI: dwc: Add reg/reg-names common properties")
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > from the pci tree.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I didn't know how to fix this up, so I just used the latter (and so lost
> > > > > > > > > > the addition of "ecam").
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Did I miss a suggested resolution for this?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We had a brief discussion about this in another thread. So basically
> > > > > > > > Stephen's resolution is fine here and the plan is to instead add the
> > > > > > > > ECAM bits that the Tegra patch does in a separate patch on top of
> > > > > > > > Serge's patch. I should get around to sending that patch tomorrow.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Actually the discussion still goes. I haven't got a respond to my
> > > > > > > last suggestion which seems to me more reasonable than extending the
> > > > > > > DT-bindings with another vendor-specific reg-name. @Bjorn, please join
> > > > > > > the discussion here:
> > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/[email protected]/
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > > > Sorry, it's really too late for discussion. I need to send the v6.2
> > > > > > pull request today or at the very latest, tomorrow, so the only thing
> > > > > > to decide is how to resolve the merge conflict in the simplest
> > > > > > possible way. Unless there's a very compelling reason to resolve it
> > > > > > differently than Stephen did, that's going to be the answer.
> > > >
> > > > Sigh... One more redundant vendor-specific name. I wish I was in the
> > > > Cc-list of the original series.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > To be more specific, the current answer is this (which is the same as
> > > > > what's in next-20221213):
> > > > >
> > > > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/helgaas/pci.git/tree/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/snps,dw-pcie.yaml?id=f64171fdd171
> > > >
> > > > Thanks. I've got it from the @Stephen message. @Thierry will submit a
> > > > new patch with the same 'ecam'-names change rebased on top of the
> > > > updated DT-schema.
> > >
> >
> > > If Rob doesn't mind this being broken in linux-next for a few more days,
> > > I can discuss this internally with our PCI and UEFI teams and find out
> > > if your proposal could be made to work.
> >
> > That would be awesome if you managed to work with the already defined
> > 'config' reg-name so the DT-schema would look a bit cleaner. Thanks
> > in advance.
>
> Looks like Linus has now pulled this in and resolved the conflict
> himself. I think there is some benefit in "ecam" being more specific
> than "config" and with ECAM being a PCIe standard mapping, it doesn't
> seem like it's worth overcomplicating things by overloading the meaning
> of "config".
It's vise versa actually. Adding the new name overcomplicates the
DT-interface for no reason. Using the 'config' name for mapping both
the unrolled and single-sided cfg-spaces would look much cleaner.
-Serge(y)
>
> Thierry