Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756579AbaDHJuu (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Apr 2014 05:50:50 -0400 Received: from service87.mimecast.com ([91.220.42.44]:33971 "EHLO service87.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756546AbaDHJun convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Apr 2014 05:50:43 -0400 Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 10:50:39 +0100 From: Liviu Dudau To: Bjorn Helgaas Cc: Arnd Bergmann , linux-pci , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , linaro-kernel , LKML , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , LAKML , Tanmay Inamdar , Grant Likely Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/6] pci: Introduce pci_register_io_range() helper function. Message-ID: <20140408095038.GT17163@e106497-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Mail-Followup-To: Bjorn Helgaas , Arnd Bergmann , linux-pci , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , linaro-kernel , LKML , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , LAKML , Tanmay Inamdar , Grant Likely References: <1394811272-1547-1-git-send-email-Liviu.Dudau@arm.com> <20140405001953.GE15806@google.com> <20140407083120.GE17163@e106497-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <5183143.FxBNM0xTAV@wuerfel> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Apr 2014 09:50:55.0655 (UTC) FILETIME=[093C1B70:01CF5310] X-MC-Unique: 114040810504103701 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 06:58:24PM +0100, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 5:36 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > I think migrating other architectures to use the same code should be > > a separate effort from adding a generic implementation that can be > > used by arm64. It's probably a good idea to have patches to convert > > arm32 and/or microblaze. > > Let me reiterate that I am 100% in favor of replacing arch-specific > code with more generic implementations. > > However, I am not 100% in favor of doing it as separate efforts > (although maybe I could be convinced). The reasons I hesitate are > that (1) if only one architecture uses a new "generic" implementation, > we really don't know whether it is generic enough, (2) until I see the > patches to convert other architectures, I have to assume that I'm the > one who will write them, and (3) as soon as we add the code to > drivers/pci, it becomes partly my headache to maintain it, even if > only one arch benefits from it. > > Please don't think I'm questioning anyone's intent or good will. It's > just that I understand the business pressures, and I know how hard it > can be to justify this sort of work to one's management, especially > after the immediate problem has been solved. I understand your concern. I guess the only way to prove my good intentions is to shut up and show the code. Liviu > > Bjorn > -- ==================== | I would like to | | fix the world, | | but they're not | | giving me the | \ source code! / --------------- ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/