Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754155AbaGKPIc (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jul 2014 11:08:32 -0400 Received: from service87.mimecast.com ([91.220.42.44]:36363 "EHLO service87.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752193AbaGKPIa convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jul 2014 11:08:30 -0400 Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 16:08:23 +0100 From: Liviu Dudau To: Catalin Marinas Cc: Bjorn Helgaas , linux-pci , Will Deacon , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Arnd Bergmann , linaro-kernel , Tanmay Inamdar , Grant Likely , Sinan Kaya , Jingoo Han , Kukjin Kim , Suravee Suthikulanit , LKML , Device Tree ML , LAKML Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 6/9] pci: Introduce a domain number for pci_host_bridge. Message-ID: <20140711150823.GU6501@e106497-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1404240214-9804-1-git-send-email-Liviu.Dudau@arm.com> <1404240214-9804-7-git-send-email-Liviu.Dudau@arm.com> <20140708005954.GC22939@google.com> <20140708104655.GC6501@e106497-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20140708224847.GC4980@e106497-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20140710094758.GA6501@e106497-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20140711141115.GB16321@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20140711141115.GB16321@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Jul 2014 15:08:24.0252 (UTC) FILETIME=[F5E9D7C0:01CF9D19] X-MC-Unique: 114071116082703601 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 Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 03:11:16PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 11:36:10PM +0100, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > Most of the rest of the v7 discussion was about "Introduce a domain > > number for pci_host_bridge." I think we should add arm64 using the > > existing pci_scan_root_bus() and keep the domain number in the arm64 > > sysdata structure like every other arch does. Isn't that feasible? > > We can worry about domain unification later. > > I think that's what we were trying to avoid, adding an arm64-specific > pci_sys_data structure (and arm64-specific API). IIUC, avoiding this > would allow the host controller drivers to use the sysdata pointer for > their own private data structures. > > Also since you can specify the domain number via DT (and in Liviu's > v8 patches read by of_create_pci_host_bridge), I think it would make > sense to have it stored in some generic data structures (e.g. > pci_host_bridge) rather than in an arm64 private sysdata. > > (Liviu is thinking of an alternative API but maybe he could briefly > describe it here before posting a new series) > > -- > Catalin My plan is to keep the domain number in the pci_host_bridge and split the creation of the pci_host_bridge out of the pci_create_root_bus(). The new function (tentatively called pci_create_new_root_bus()) will no longer call pci_alloc_host_bridge() but will accept it as a parameter, allowing one to be able to set the domain_nr ahead of the root bus creation. Best regards, Liviu -- ==================== | 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/