Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753686AbcL3KqQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Dec 2016 05:46:16 -0500 Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com ([119.145.14.65]:44405 "EHLO szxga02-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751978AbcL3KqP (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Dec 2016 05:46:15 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 09/14] ACPI: platform: setup MSI domain for ACPI based platform device To: Sinan Kaya , "Rafael J. Wysocki" References: <1482384922-21507-1-git-send-email-guohanjun@huawei.com> <1482384922-21507-10-git-send-email-guohanjun@huawei.com> <585E24FB.9050805@huawei.com> <586072E9.3060609@huawei.com> <9aa650ad-a32d-e942-1c6b-b069c8a2b87a@codeaurora.org> CC: Marc Zyngier , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Lorenzo Pieralisi , "ACPI Devel Maling List" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Thomas Gleixner , Greg KH , Tomasz Nowicki , Ma Jun , Kefeng Wang , "Agustin Vega-Frias" , Charles Garcia-Tobin , , , , Jon Masters , Hanjun Guo From: Hanjun Guo Message-ID: <586639B5.8010705@huawei.com> Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2016 18:40:53 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <9aa650ad-a32d-e942-1c6b-b069c8a2b87a@codeaurora.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.177.17.188] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020202.58663AF0.028A,ss=1,re=0.000,recu=0.000,reip=0.000,cl=1,cld=1,fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32 X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 08681d22f7becda6eda92a8f3842d40d Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1009 Lines: 22 On 2016/12/29 22:44, Sinan Kaya wrote: > On 12/25/2016 8:31 PM, Hanjun Guo wrote: >>> A type->setup() would be somewhat cleaner I think, but then it's more >>> code. Whichever works better I guess. :-) >> Agree, I will demo the type->setup() way and send out the patch for review, >> also I find one minor issue for the IORT code, will update that also for next >> version. > Can you provide details on what the minor issue is with the IORT code? It's about the mapping of NC (named component) -> SMMU -> ITS, we can describe it as two ID mappings: - NC->SMMU - NC->ITS And the code for now can work perfect for such id mappings, but if we want to support chained mapping NC -> SMMU -> ITS, we need to add extra code which in my [PATCH v5 10/14] ACPI: ARM64: IORT: rework iort_node_get_id() for NC->SMMU->ITS case, but I just scanned the first id mapping for now, I think I need to scan all the id mappings (but seems single id mappings don't need to do that, I will investigate it more). Thanks Hanjun