Allow the Qualcomm PCIe controller driver to be built as a module, which
is useful for multi-platform kernels as well as during development.
Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <[email protected]>
---
drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig | 2 +-
drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++---
2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig
index 62ce3abf0f19..230f56d1a268 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig
@@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ config PCI_HISI
Hip05 and Hip06 SoCs
config PCIE_QCOM
- bool "Qualcomm PCIe controller"
+ tristate "Qualcomm PCIe controller"
depends on OF && (ARCH_QCOM || COMPILE_TEST)
depends on PCI_MSI_IRQ_DOMAIN
select PCIE_DW_HOST
diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
index 8523b5ef9d16..e25d5c09657c 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@
#include <linux/io.h>
#include <linux/iopoll.h>
#include <linux/kernel.h>
-#include <linux/init.h>
+#include <linux/module.h>
#include <linux/of_device.h>
#include <linux/of_gpio.h>
#include <linux/pci.h>
@@ -1425,6 +1425,15 @@ static int qcom_pcie_host_init(struct pcie_port *pp)
return ret;
}
+static void qcom_pcie_host_deinit(struct qcom_pcie *pcie)
+{
+ qcom_ep_reset_assert(pcie);
+ if (pcie->cfg->ops->post_deinit)
+ pcie->cfg->ops->post_deinit(pcie);
+ phy_power_off(pcie->phy);
+ pcie->cfg->ops->deinit(pcie);
+}
+
static const struct dw_pcie_host_ops qcom_pcie_dw_ops = {
.host_init = qcom_pcie_host_init,
};
@@ -1651,6 +1660,22 @@ static int qcom_pcie_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
return ret;
}
+static int qcom_pcie_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+ struct qcom_pcie *pcie = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
+ struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
+
+ dw_pcie_host_deinit(&pcie->pci->pp);
+ qcom_pcie_host_deinit(pcie);
+
+ phy_exit(pcie->phy);
+
+ pm_runtime_put_sync(dev);
+ pm_runtime_disable(dev);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
static const struct of_device_id qcom_pcie_match[] = {
{ .compatible = "qcom,pcie-apq8084", .data = &apq8084_cfg },
{ .compatible = "qcom,pcie-ipq8064", .data = &ipq8064_cfg },
@@ -1669,6 +1694,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id qcom_pcie_match[] = {
{ .compatible = "qcom,pcie-sc7280", .data = &sc7280_cfg },
{ }
};
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, qcom_pcie_match);
static void qcom_fixup_class(struct pci_dev *dev)
{
@@ -1684,10 +1710,14 @@ DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_EARLY(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QCOM, 0x1001, qcom_fixup_class);
static struct platform_driver qcom_pcie_driver = {
.probe = qcom_pcie_probe,
+ .remove = qcom_pcie_remove,
.driver = {
.name = "qcom-pcie",
- .suppress_bind_attrs = true,
.of_match_table = qcom_pcie_match,
},
};
-builtin_platform_driver(qcom_pcie_driver);
+module_platform_driver(qcom_pcie_driver);
+
+MODULE_AUTHOR("Stanimir Varbanov <[email protected]>");
+MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Qualcomm PCIe root complex driver");
+MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
--
2.35.1
On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 11:46:46AM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> Allow the Qualcomm PCIe controller driver to be built as a module, which
> is useful for multi-platform kernels as well as during development.
>
> Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig | 2 +-
> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <[email protected]>
On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 03:53:04PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 11:46:46AM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > Allow the Qualcomm PCIe controller driver to be built as a module, which
> > is useful for multi-platform kernels as well as during development.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig | 2 +-
> > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++---
> > 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <[email protected]>
Lorenzo, Bjorn H, any comments to this one?
Johan
On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 11:46:46AM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> Allow the Qualcomm PCIe controller driver to be built as a module, which
> is useful for multi-platform kernels as well as during development.
>
> Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig | 2 +-
> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig
> index 62ce3abf0f19..230f56d1a268 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig
> @@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ config PCI_HISI
> Hip05 and Hip06 SoCs
>
> config PCIE_QCOM
> - bool "Qualcomm PCIe controller"
> + tristate "Qualcomm PCIe controller"
> depends on OF && (ARCH_QCOM || COMPILE_TEST)
> depends on PCI_MSI_IRQ_DOMAIN
> select PCIE_DW_HOST
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> index 8523b5ef9d16..e25d5c09657c 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@
> #include <linux/io.h>
> #include <linux/iopoll.h>
> #include <linux/kernel.h>
> -#include <linux/init.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> #include <linux/of_device.h>
> #include <linux/of_gpio.h>
> #include <linux/pci.h>
> @@ -1425,6 +1425,15 @@ static int qcom_pcie_host_init(struct pcie_port *pp)
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static void qcom_pcie_host_deinit(struct qcom_pcie *pcie)
> +{
> + qcom_ep_reset_assert(pcie);
> + if (pcie->cfg->ops->post_deinit)
> + pcie->cfg->ops->post_deinit(pcie);
> + phy_power_off(pcie->phy);
> + pcie->cfg->ops->deinit(pcie);
These post_deinit/deinit names look backwards. Why would we call a
"post_deinit()" method *before* the "deinit()" method? It would make
sense if we called "pre_deinit()" followed by "deinit()".
> static const struct dw_pcie_host_ops qcom_pcie_dw_ops = {
> .host_init = qcom_pcie_host_init,
> };
> @@ -1651,6 +1660,22 @@ static int qcom_pcie_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static int qcom_pcie_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct qcom_pcie *pcie = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> +
> + dw_pcie_host_deinit(&pcie->pci->pp);
> + qcom_pcie_host_deinit(pcie);
> +
> + phy_exit(pcie->phy);
> +
> + pm_runtime_put_sync(dev);
> + pm_runtime_disable(dev);
Why is this not more symmetric with qcom_pcie_probe()? Maybe struct
dw_pcie_host_ops needs a new .host_deinit() pointer that would be
called from dw_pcie_host_deinit()?
In the probe path, we have this:
qcom_pcie_probe
pm_runtime_enable
pm_runtime_get_sync
phy_init(pcie->phy)
dw_pcie_host_init
pp->ops->host_init
qcom_pcie_host_init # .host_init()
pcie->cfg->ops->init(pcie)
phy_power_on(pcie->phy)
pcie->cfg->ops->post_init(pcie)
qcom_ep_reset_deassert(pcie)
The remove path does do things in the opposite order, which makes
sense, but the call to qcom_pcie_host_deinit() breaks the symmetry:
qcom_pcie_remove
dw_pcie_host_deinit
qcom_pcie_host_deinit
qcom_ep_reset_assert
pcie->cfg->ops->post_deinit
phy_power_off(pcie->phy)
pcie->cfg->ops->deinit
phy_exit(pcie->phy)
pm_runtime_put_sync
pm_runtime_disable
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> static const struct of_device_id qcom_pcie_match[] = {
> { .compatible = "qcom,pcie-apq8084", .data = &apq8084_cfg },
> { .compatible = "qcom,pcie-ipq8064", .data = &ipq8064_cfg },
> @@ -1669,6 +1694,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id qcom_pcie_match[] = {
> { .compatible = "qcom,pcie-sc7280", .data = &sc7280_cfg },
> { }
> };
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, qcom_pcie_match);
>
> static void qcom_fixup_class(struct pci_dev *dev)
> {
> @@ -1684,10 +1710,14 @@ DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_EARLY(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QCOM, 0x1001, qcom_fixup_class);
>
> static struct platform_driver qcom_pcie_driver = {
> .probe = qcom_pcie_probe,
> + .remove = qcom_pcie_remove,
> .driver = {
> .name = "qcom-pcie",
> - .suppress_bind_attrs = true,
> .of_match_table = qcom_pcie_match,
> },
> };
> -builtin_platform_driver(qcom_pcie_driver);
> +module_platform_driver(qcom_pcie_driver);
> +
> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Stanimir Varbanov <[email protected]>");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Qualcomm PCIe root complex driver");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> --
> 2.35.1
>
On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 10:52:13AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 11:46:46AM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > Allow the Qualcomm PCIe controller driver to be built as a module, which
> > is useful for multi-platform kernels as well as during development.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > +static void qcom_pcie_host_deinit(struct qcom_pcie *pcie)
> > +{
> > + qcom_ep_reset_assert(pcie);
> > + if (pcie->cfg->ops->post_deinit)
> > + pcie->cfg->ops->post_deinit(pcie);
> > + phy_power_off(pcie->phy);
> > + pcie->cfg->ops->deinit(pcie);
>
> These post_deinit/deinit names look backwards. Why would we call a
> "post_deinit()" method *before* the "deinit()" method? It would make
> sense if we called "pre_deinit()" followed by "deinit()".
Yeah, that annoys me as well, but those are the names the driver
currently use.
I considered renaming the deinit callback but instead sent a follow up
patch to remove both of these callbacks now that the pipe clock rework
that depends on them has been merged, but seems like the post_init one
will be needed for the DBI accesses.
I can respin the above mentioned patch to drop or or rename the badly
named one when things settle down a bit.
> > static const struct dw_pcie_host_ops qcom_pcie_dw_ops = {
> > .host_init = qcom_pcie_host_init,
> > };
> > @@ -1651,6 +1660,22 @@ static int qcom_pcie_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > +static int qcom_pcie_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > + struct qcom_pcie *pcie = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> > + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> > +
> > + dw_pcie_host_deinit(&pcie->pci->pp);
> > + qcom_pcie_host_deinit(pcie);
> > +
> > + phy_exit(pcie->phy);
> > +
> > + pm_runtime_put_sync(dev);
> > + pm_runtime_disable(dev);
>
> Why is this not more symmetric with qcom_pcie_probe()? Maybe struct
> dw_pcie_host_ops needs a new .host_deinit() pointer that would be
> called from dw_pcie_host_deinit()?
Yeah, I considered that too but decided it's not needed to implement
modular builds for this driver. Instead I did the ground work by adding
a deinit helper function so that it's easier to track any additions to
the host_init() callback and which can later be called by core if
someone decides to clean up core and add a deinit callback.
Looks like someone just posted something along these lines, but this
would conflict with the split MSI series which is otherwise ready to be
merged:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Also note that there are other drivers that implement remove() without
this callback already today.
> In the probe path, we have this:
>
> qcom_pcie_probe
> pm_runtime_enable
> pm_runtime_get_sync
> phy_init(pcie->phy)
> dw_pcie_host_init
> pp->ops->host_init
> qcom_pcie_host_init # .host_init()
> pcie->cfg->ops->init(pcie)
> phy_power_on(pcie->phy)
> pcie->cfg->ops->post_init(pcie)
> qcom_ep_reset_deassert(pcie)
>
> The remove path does do things in the opposite order, which makes
> sense, but the call to qcom_pcie_host_deinit() breaks the symmetry:
>
> qcom_pcie_remove
> dw_pcie_host_deinit
> qcom_pcie_host_deinit
> qcom_ep_reset_assert
> pcie->cfg->ops->post_deinit
> phy_power_off(pcie->phy)
> pcie->cfg->ops->deinit
> phy_exit(pcie->phy)
> pm_runtime_put_sync
> pm_runtime_disable
Yeah, I didn't want to go rewrite core just for this basic driver
functionality. Especially with so many things already in flux.
As mentioned above, everything is instead prepared to move over to such
a callback if and when it materialises.
Johan
Hi Johan,
Please take a look why we made it built-in first [1].
If arguments there are still valid I don't see why to make it a module
again.
[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/24/694
On 5/19/22 12:46, Johan Hovold wrote:
> Allow the Qualcomm PCIe controller driver to be built as a module, which
> is useful for multi-platform kernels as well as during development.
>
> Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig | 2 +-
> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
--
regards,
Stan
On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 03:19:49PM +0300, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
> Hi Johan,
>
> Please take a look why we made it built-in first [1].
>
> If arguments there are still valid I don't see why to make it a module
> again.
Yeah, I've seen that patch, and many just like that one by the same
author, and I don't think the arguments spelled out there are valid.
Sure, the Kconfig symbol for this driver was bool at the time so the
remove() code could not have received much testing, but the patch
ignores the fact that preventing drivers to be built as modules is
detrimental to multi-platform builds (e.g. Android GKI).
As I mention in passing below, being able to build a driver as a module
is also really useful during development. Not least to be able to test
power-sequencing and making sure that you're not unknowingly relying on
boot firmware to have set things up for you.
> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/24/694
>
> On 5/19/22 12:46, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > Allow the Qualcomm PCIe controller driver to be built as a module, which
> > is useful for multi-platform kernels as well as during development.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig | 2 +-
> > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++---
> > 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Johan
Hi Stanimir,
On 14/07/2022 15:19, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
> Hi Johan,
>
> Please take a look why we made it built-in first [1].
>
> If arguments there are still valid I don't see why to make it a module
> again.
>
> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/24/694
It looks like there is a move to make all non-essential drivers
buildable as modules. For example, the Kirin, dra7xx, Meson PCI
controllers are now buildable as modules. So I think we can follow that
and allow building the pcie-qcom as a module.
>
> On 5/19/22 12:46, Johan Hovold wrote:
>> Allow the Qualcomm PCIe controller driver to be built as a module, which
>> is useful for multi-platform kernels as well as during development.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig | 2 +-
>> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++---
>> 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>
>
--
With best wishes
Dmitry
On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 04:05:41PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On 14/07/2022 15:19, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
> > Please take a look why we made it built-in first [1].
> >
> > If arguments there are still valid I don't see why to make it a module
> > again.
> >
> > [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/24/694
>
> It looks like there is a move to make all non-essential drivers buildable as
> modules. For example, the Kirin, dra7xx, Meson PCI controllers are now
> buildable as modules. So I think we can follow that and allow building the
> pcie-qcom as a module.
IIUC the arguments in [1] are that:
- Kconfig is bool, so it can't be built as a module
- there's no sensible use case for unbind
Those described the situation at the time, and there's no point in
having .remove() and using module_platform_driver() if Kconfig is
bool.
But they don't seem like arguments for why the driver couldn't be
*made* modular.
I think drivers *should* be modular unless there's a technical reason
they can't be.
Bjorn
On 7/15/22 19:56, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 04:05:41PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> On 14/07/2022 15:19, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
>>> Please take a look why we made it built-in first [1].
>>>
>>> If arguments there are still valid I don't see why to make it a module
>>> again.
>>>
>>> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/24/694
>>
>> It looks like there is a move to make all non-essential drivers buildable as
>> modules. For example, the Kirin, dra7xx, Meson PCI controllers are now
>> buildable as modules. So I think we can follow that and allow building the
>> pcie-qcom as a module.
>
> IIUC the arguments in [1] are that:
>
> - Kconfig is bool, so it can't be built as a module
> - there's no sensible use case for unbind
>
> Those described the situation at the time, and there's no point in
> having .remove() and using module_platform_driver() if Kconfig is
> bool.
>
> But they don't seem like arguments for why the driver couldn't be
> *made* modular.
I guess the core of the problem was lack of dw_pcie_host_deinit() at
that time.
>
> I think drivers *should* be modular unless there's a technical reason
> they can't be.
I agree.
>
> Bjorn
--
regards,
Stan
On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 11:46:46AM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> Allow the Qualcomm PCIe controller driver to be built as a module, which
> is useful for multi-platform kernels as well as during development.
>
> Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <[email protected]>
Thanks,
Mani
> ---
> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig | 2 +-
> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig
> index 62ce3abf0f19..230f56d1a268 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig
> @@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ config PCI_HISI
> Hip05 and Hip06 SoCs
>
> config PCIE_QCOM
> - bool "Qualcomm PCIe controller"
> + tristate "Qualcomm PCIe controller"
> depends on OF && (ARCH_QCOM || COMPILE_TEST)
> depends on PCI_MSI_IRQ_DOMAIN
> select PCIE_DW_HOST
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> index 8523b5ef9d16..e25d5c09657c 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@
> #include <linux/io.h>
> #include <linux/iopoll.h>
> #include <linux/kernel.h>
> -#include <linux/init.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> #include <linux/of_device.h>
> #include <linux/of_gpio.h>
> #include <linux/pci.h>
> @@ -1425,6 +1425,15 @@ static int qcom_pcie_host_init(struct pcie_port *pp)
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static void qcom_pcie_host_deinit(struct qcom_pcie *pcie)
> +{
> + qcom_ep_reset_assert(pcie);
> + if (pcie->cfg->ops->post_deinit)
> + pcie->cfg->ops->post_deinit(pcie);
> + phy_power_off(pcie->phy);
> + pcie->cfg->ops->deinit(pcie);
> +}
> +
> static const struct dw_pcie_host_ops qcom_pcie_dw_ops = {
> .host_init = qcom_pcie_host_init,
> };
> @@ -1651,6 +1660,22 @@ static int qcom_pcie_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static int qcom_pcie_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct qcom_pcie *pcie = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> +
> + dw_pcie_host_deinit(&pcie->pci->pp);
> + qcom_pcie_host_deinit(pcie);
> +
> + phy_exit(pcie->phy);
> +
> + pm_runtime_put_sync(dev);
> + pm_runtime_disable(dev);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> static const struct of_device_id qcom_pcie_match[] = {
> { .compatible = "qcom,pcie-apq8084", .data = &apq8084_cfg },
> { .compatible = "qcom,pcie-ipq8064", .data = &ipq8064_cfg },
> @@ -1669,6 +1694,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id qcom_pcie_match[] = {
> { .compatible = "qcom,pcie-sc7280", .data = &sc7280_cfg },
> { }
> };
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, qcom_pcie_match);
>
> static void qcom_fixup_class(struct pci_dev *dev)
> {
> @@ -1684,10 +1710,14 @@ DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_EARLY(PCI_VENDOR_ID_QCOM, 0x1001, qcom_fixup_class);
>
> static struct platform_driver qcom_pcie_driver = {
> .probe = qcom_pcie_probe,
> + .remove = qcom_pcie_remove,
> .driver = {
> .name = "qcom-pcie",
> - .suppress_bind_attrs = true,
> .of_match_table = qcom_pcie_match,
> },
> };
> -builtin_platform_driver(qcom_pcie_driver);
> +module_platform_driver(qcom_pcie_driver);
> +
> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Stanimir Varbanov <[email protected]>");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Qualcomm PCIe root complex driver");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> --
> 2.35.1
>
On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 11:46:46AM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> Allow the Qualcomm PCIe controller driver to be built as a module, which
> is useful for multi-platform kernels as well as during development.
>
> Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <[email protected]>
This no longer applies on my pci/ctrl/qcom branch:
839fbdee4c08 ("dt-bindings: PCI: qcom: Fix reset conditional")
Do you want to refresh it, or should we wait until the next cycle?
Bjorn
On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 04:20:53PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 11:46:46AM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > Allow the Qualcomm PCIe controller driver to be built as a module, which
> > is useful for multi-platform kernels as well as during development.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <[email protected]>
>
> This no longer applies on my pci/ctrl/qcom branch:
> 839fbdee4c08 ("dt-bindings: PCI: qcom: Fix reset conditional")
>
> Do you want to refresh it, or should we wait until the next cycle?
I just sent a rebased v2 (the context had changed due to the addition of
the ipq6018 device-id entry):
https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
Johan