From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753994AbaIZIwE (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Sep 2014 04:52:04 -0400 Received: from dliviu.plus.com ([80.229.23.120]:45205 "EHLO smtp.dudau.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753187AbaIZIwA (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Sep 2014 04:52:00 -0400 Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 09:50:30 +0100 From: Liviu Dudau To: Yijing Wang Cc: Thierry Reding , Bjorn Helgaas , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Xinwei Hu , Wuyun , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Russell King , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, arnab.basu@freescale.com, Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com, x86@kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann , Thomas Gleixner , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Joerg Roedel , iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Benjamin Herrenschmidt , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Sebastian Ott , Tony Luck , linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, Chris Metcalf , Ralf Baechle , Lucas Stach , David Vrabel , Sergei Shtylyov , Michael Ellerman , Thomas Petazzoni Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/22] Use MSI chip framework to configure MSI/MSI-X in all platforms Message-ID: <20140926085030.GE31157@bart.dudau.co.uk> References: <1411614872-4009-1-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <20140925074235.GN12423@ulmo> <20140925144855.GB31157@bart.dudau.co.uk> <20140925164937.GB30382@ulmo> <5424E09F.50701@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5424E09F.50701@huawei.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-DSPAM-Result: Whitelisted X-DSPAM-Processed: Fri Sep 26 09:51:58 2014 X-DSPAM-Confidence: 0.9899 X-DSPAM-Probability: 0.0000 X-DSPAM-Signature: 13,5425292e3111863064294 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:42:23AM +0800, Yijing Wang wrote: > >> I am actually in disagreement with you, Thierry. I don't like the general direction > >> of the patches, or at least I don't like the fact that we don't have a portable > >> way of setting up the msi_chip without having to rely on weak architectural hooks. > > > > Oh, good. That's actually one of the things I said I wasn't happy with > > either. =) > > Hm, I decide to drop weak arch_find_msi_chip(), no one likes it. > Let's find a better solution :) > > > > >> I'm surprised no one considers the case of a platform having more than one host > >> bridge and possibly more than one MSI unit. With the current proposed patchset I > >> can't see how that would work. > > > > The PCI core can already deal with that. An MSI chip can be set per bus > > and the weak pcibios_add_bus() can be used to set that. Often it might > > not even be necessary to do it via pcibios_add_bus() if you create the > > root bus directly, since you can attach the MSI chip at that time. > > Yes, PCI hostbridge driver find the matched msi chip during its initialization, > and assign the msi chip to PCI bus in pcibios_add_bus(). > > > > >> What I would like to see is a way of creating the pci_host_bridge structure outside > >> the pci_create_root_bus(). That would then allow us to pass this sort of platform > >> details like associated msi_chip into the host bridge and the child busses will > >> have an easy way of finding the information needed by finding the root bus and then > >> the host bridge structure. Then the generic pci_scan_root_bus() can be used by (mostly) > >> everyone and the drivers can remove their kludges that try to work around the > >> current limitations. > > So I think maybe save msi chip in PCI arch sysdata is a good candidate. Except that arch sysdata at the moment is an opaque pointer. I am all in favour in changing the type of sysdata from void* into pci_host_bridge* and arches can wrap their old sysdata around the pci_host_bridge*. Best regards, Liviu > > > > > I think both issues are orthogonal. Last time I checked a lot of work > > was still necessary to unify host bridges enough so that it could be > > shared across architectures. But perhaps some of that work has > > happened in the meantime. > > > > But like I said, when you create the root bus, you can easily attach the > > MSI chip to it. > > > > Thierry > > > > > -- > Thanks! > Yijing > > -- ------------------- .oooO ( ) \ ( Oooo. \_) ( ) ) / (_/ One small step for me ... From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Liviu Dudau Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/22] Use MSI chip framework to configure MSI/MSI-X in all platforms Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 09:50:30 +0100 Message-ID: <20140926085030.GE31157@bart.dudau.co.uk> References: <1411614872-4009-1-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <20140925074235.GN12423@ulmo> <20140925144855.GB31157@bart.dudau.co.uk> <20140925164937.GB30382@ulmo> <5424E09F.50701@huawei.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5424E09F.50701-hv44wF8Li93QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: iommu-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: iommu-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: Yijing Wang Cc: linux-mips-6z/3iImG2C8G8FEW9MqTrA@public.gmane.org, linux-ia64-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-pci-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Thierry Reding , sparclinux-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-arch-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-s390-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Russell King , Michael Ellerman , x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, Sebastian Ott , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , xen-devel-GuqFBffKawtpuQazS67q72D2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org, arnab.basu-KZfg59tc24xl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org, Arnd Bergmann , Chris Metcalf , Bjorn Helgaas , Thomas Gleixner , linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, Thomas Petazzoni , Xinwei Hu , Tony Luck , Sergei Shtylyov , linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Ralf Baechle , iom List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:42:23AM +0800, Yijing Wang wrote: > >> I am actually in disagreement with you, Thierry. I don't like the general direction > >> of the patches, or at least I don't like the fact that we don't have a portable > >> way of setting up the msi_chip without having to rely on weak architectural hooks. > > > > Oh, good. That's actually one of the things I said I wasn't happy with > > either. =) > > Hm, I decide to drop weak arch_find_msi_chip(), no one likes it. > Let's find a better solution :) > > > > >> I'm surprised no one considers the case of a platform having more than one host > >> bridge and possibly more than one MSI unit. With the current proposed patchset I > >> can't see how that would work. > > > > The PCI core can already deal with that. An MSI chip can be set per bus > > and the weak pcibios_add_bus() can be used to set that. Often it might > > not even be necessary to do it via pcibios_add_bus() if you create the > > root bus directly, since you can attach the MSI chip at that time. > > Yes, PCI hostbridge driver find the matched msi chip during its initialization, > and assign the msi chip to PCI bus in pcibios_add_bus(). > > > > >> What I would like to see is a way of creating the pci_host_bridge structure outside > >> the pci_create_root_bus(). That would then allow us to pass this sort of platform > >> details like associated msi_chip into the host bridge and the child busses will > >> have an easy way of finding the information needed by finding the root bus and then > >> the host bridge structure. Then the generic pci_scan_root_bus() can be used by (mostly) > >> everyone and the drivers can remove their kludges that try to work around the > >> current limitations. > > So I think maybe save msi chip in PCI arch sysdata is a good candidate. Except that arch sysdata at the moment is an opaque pointer. I am all in favour in changing the type of sysdata from void* into pci_host_bridge* and arches can wrap their old sysdata around the pci_host_bridge*. Best regards, Liviu > > > > > I think both issues are orthogonal. Last time I checked a lot of work > > was still necessary to unify host bridges enough so that it could be > > shared across architectures. But perhaps some of that work has > > happened in the meantime. > > > > But like I said, when you create the root bus, you can easily attach the > > MSI chip to it. > > > > Thierry > > > > > -- > Thanks! > Yijing > > -- ------------------- .oooO ( ) \ ( Oooo. \_) ( ) ) / (_/ One small step for me ... From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Liviu Dudau Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 08:50:30 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/22] Use MSI chip framework to configure MSI/MSI-X in all platforms Message-Id: <20140926085030.GE31157@bart.dudau.co.uk> List-Id: References: <1411614872-4009-1-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <20140925074235.GN12423@ulmo> <20140925144855.GB31157@bart.dudau.co.uk> <20140925164937.GB30382@ulmo> <5424E09F.50701@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <5424E09F.50701-hv44wF8Li93QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Yijing Wang Cc: linux-mips-6z/3iImG2C8G8FEW9MqTrA@public.gmane.org, linux-ia64-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-pci-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Thierry Reding , sparclinux-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-arch-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-s390-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Russell King , Michael Ellerman , x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, Sebastian Ott , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , xen-devel-GuqFBffKawtpuQazS67q72D2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org, arnab.basu-KZfg59tc24xl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org, Arnd Bergmann , Chris Metcalf , Bjorn Helgaas , Thomas Gleixner , linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, Thomas Petazzoni , Xinwei Hu , Tony Luck , Sergei Shtylyov , linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Ralf Baechle , iom On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:42:23AM +0800, Yijing Wang wrote: > >> I am actually in disagreement with you, Thierry. I don't like the general direction > >> of the patches, or at least I don't like the fact that we don't have a portable > >> way of setting up the msi_chip without having to rely on weak architectural hooks. > > > > Oh, good. That's actually one of the things I said I wasn't happy with > > either. =) > > Hm, I decide to drop weak arch_find_msi_chip(), no one likes it. > Let's find a better solution :) > > > > >> I'm surprised no one considers the case of a platform having more than one host > >> bridge and possibly more than one MSI unit. With the current proposed patchset I > >> can't see how that would work. > > > > The PCI core can already deal with that. An MSI chip can be set per bus > > and the weak pcibios_add_bus() can be used to set that. Often it might > > not even be necessary to do it via pcibios_add_bus() if you create the > > root bus directly, since you can attach the MSI chip at that time. > > Yes, PCI hostbridge driver find the matched msi chip during its initialization, > and assign the msi chip to PCI bus in pcibios_add_bus(). > > > > >> What I would like to see is a way of creating the pci_host_bridge structure outside > >> the pci_create_root_bus(). That would then allow us to pass this sort of platform > >> details like associated msi_chip into the host bridge and the child busses will > >> have an easy way of finding the information needed by finding the root bus and then > >> the host bridge structure. Then the generic pci_scan_root_bus() can be used by (mostly) > >> everyone and the drivers can remove their kludges that try to work around the > >> current limitations. > > So I think maybe save msi chip in PCI arch sysdata is a good candidate. Except that arch sysdata at the moment is an opaque pointer. I am all in favour in changing the type of sysdata from void* into pci_host_bridge* and arches can wrap their old sysdata around the pci_host_bridge*. Best regards, Liviu > > > > > I think both issues are orthogonal. Last time I checked a lot of work > > was still necessary to unify host bridges enough so that it could be > > shared across architectures. But perhaps some of that work has > > happened in the meantime. > > > > But like I said, when you create the root bus, you can easily attach the > > MSI chip to it. > > > > Thierry > > > > > -- > Thanks! > Yijing > > -- ------------------- .oooO ( ) \ ( Oooo. \_) ( ) ) / (_/ One small step for me ... From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.dudau.co.uk (dliviu.plus.com [80.229.23.120]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C51E01A00C8 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 18:51:48 +1000 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.dudau.co.uk (Postfix) with SMTP id C97E1FFDD9 for ; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 09:51:46 +0100 (BST) Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 09:50:30 +0100 From: Liviu Dudau To: Yijing Wang Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/22] Use MSI chip framework to configure MSI/MSI-X in all platforms Message-ID: <20140926085030.GE31157@bart.dudau.co.uk> References: <1411614872-4009-1-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <20140925074235.GN12423@ulmo> <20140925144855.GB31157@bart.dudau.co.uk> <20140925164937.GB30382@ulmo> <5424E09F.50701@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 In-Reply-To: <5424E09F.50701@huawei.com> Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com, Thierry Reding , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Russell King , Joerg Roedel , x86@kernel.org, Sebastian Ott , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, arnab.basu@freescale.com, Arnd Bergmann , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , Chris Metcalf , Bjorn Helgaas , Thomas Gleixner , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Thomas Petazzoni , Xinwei Hu , Tony Luck , Sergei Shtylyov , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ralf Baechle , iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, David Vrabel , Wuyun , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, "David S. Miller" , Lucas Stach List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:42:23AM +0800, Yijing Wang wrote: > >> I am actually in disagreement with you, Thierry. I don't like the general direction > >> of the patches, or at least I don't like the fact that we don't have a portable > >> way of setting up the msi_chip without having to rely on weak architectural hooks. > > > > Oh, good. That's actually one of the things I said I wasn't happy with > > either. =) > > Hm, I decide to drop weak arch_find_msi_chip(), no one likes it. > Let's find a better solution :) > > > > >> I'm surprised no one considers the case of a platform having more than one host > >> bridge and possibly more than one MSI unit. With the current proposed patchset I > >> can't see how that would work. > > > > The PCI core can already deal with that. An MSI chip can be set per bus > > and the weak pcibios_add_bus() can be used to set that. Often it might > > not even be necessary to do it via pcibios_add_bus() if you create the > > root bus directly, since you can attach the MSI chip at that time. > > Yes, PCI hostbridge driver find the matched msi chip during its initialization, > and assign the msi chip to PCI bus in pcibios_add_bus(). > > > > >> What I would like to see is a way of creating the pci_host_bridge structure outside > >> the pci_create_root_bus(). That would then allow us to pass this sort of platform > >> details like associated msi_chip into the host bridge and the child busses will > >> have an easy way of finding the information needed by finding the root bus and then > >> the host bridge structure. Then the generic pci_scan_root_bus() can be used by (mostly) > >> everyone and the drivers can remove their kludges that try to work around the > >> current limitations. > > So I think maybe save msi chip in PCI arch sysdata is a good candidate. Except that arch sysdata at the moment is an opaque pointer. I am all in favour in changing the type of sysdata from void* into pci_host_bridge* and arches can wrap their old sysdata around the pci_host_bridge*. Best regards, Liviu > > > > > I think both issues are orthogonal. Last time I checked a lot of work > > was still necessary to unify host bridges enough so that it could be > > shared across architectures. But perhaps some of that work has > > happened in the meantime. > > > > But like I said, when you create the root bus, you can easily attach the > > MSI chip to it. > > > > Thierry > > > > > -- > Thanks! > Yijing > > -- ------------------- .oooO ( ) \ ( Oooo. \_) ( ) ) / (_/ One small step for me ... From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: liviu@dudau.co.uk (Liviu Dudau) Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 09:50:30 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v2 00/22] Use MSI chip framework to configure MSI/MSI-X in all platforms In-Reply-To: <5424E09F.50701@huawei.com> References: <1411614872-4009-1-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <20140925074235.GN12423@ulmo> <20140925144855.GB31157@bart.dudau.co.uk> <20140925164937.GB30382@ulmo> <5424E09F.50701@huawei.com> Message-ID: <20140926085030.GE31157@bart.dudau.co.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:42:23AM +0800, Yijing Wang wrote: > >> I am actually in disagreement with you, Thierry. I don't like the general direction > >> of the patches, or at least I don't like the fact that we don't have a portable > >> way of setting up the msi_chip without having to rely on weak architectural hooks. > > > > Oh, good. That's actually one of the things I said I wasn't happy with > > either. =) > > Hm, I decide to drop weak arch_find_msi_chip(), no one likes it. > Let's find a better solution :) > > > > >> I'm surprised no one considers the case of a platform having more than one host > >> bridge and possibly more than one MSI unit. With the current proposed patchset I > >> can't see how that would work. > > > > The PCI core can already deal with that. An MSI chip can be set per bus > > and the weak pcibios_add_bus() can be used to set that. Often it might > > not even be necessary to do it via pcibios_add_bus() if you create the > > root bus directly, since you can attach the MSI chip at that time. > > Yes, PCI hostbridge driver find the matched msi chip during its initialization, > and assign the msi chip to PCI bus in pcibios_add_bus(). > > > > >> What I would like to see is a way of creating the pci_host_bridge structure outside > >> the pci_create_root_bus(). That would then allow us to pass this sort of platform > >> details like associated msi_chip into the host bridge and the child busses will > >> have an easy way of finding the information needed by finding the root bus and then > >> the host bridge structure. Then the generic pci_scan_root_bus() can be used by (mostly) > >> everyone and the drivers can remove their kludges that try to work around the > >> current limitations. > > So I think maybe save msi chip in PCI arch sysdata is a good candidate. Except that arch sysdata at the moment is an opaque pointer. I am all in favour in changing the type of sysdata from void* into pci_host_bridge* and arches can wrap their old sysdata around the pci_host_bridge*. Best regards, Liviu > > > > > I think both issues are orthogonal. Last time I checked a lot of work > > was still necessary to unify host bridges enough so that it could be > > shared across architectures. But perhaps some of that work has > > happened in the meantime. > > > > But like I said, when you create the root bus, you can easily attach the > > MSI chip to it. > > > > Thierry > > > > > -- > Thanks! > Yijing > > -- ------------------- .oooO ( ) \ ( Oooo. \_) ( ) ) / (_/ One small step for me ... From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Liviu Dudau Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 08:50:30 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/22] Use MSI chip framework to configure MSI/MSI-X in all platforms Message-Id: <20140926085030.GE31157@bart.dudau.co.uk> List-Id: References: <1411614872-4009-1-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com> <20140925074235.GN12423@ulmo> <20140925144855.GB31157@bart.dudau.co.uk> <20140925164937.GB30382@ulmo> <5424E09F.50701@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <5424E09F.50701@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Yijing Wang Cc: Thierry Reding , Bjorn Helgaas , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Xinwei Hu , Wuyun , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Russell King , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, arnab.basu@freescale.com, Bharat.Bhushan@freescale.com, x86@kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann , Thomas Gleixner , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Joerg Roedel , iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Benjamin Herrenschmidt , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Sebastian Ott , Tony Luck , linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, Chris Metcalf , Ralf Baechle , Lucas Stach , David Vrabel , Sergei Shtylyov , Michael Ellerman , Thomas Petazzoni On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:42:23AM +0800, Yijing Wang wrote: > >> I am actually in disagreement with you, Thierry. I don't like the general direction > >> of the patches, or at least I don't like the fact that we don't have a portable > >> way of setting up the msi_chip without having to rely on weak architectural hooks. > > > > Oh, good. That's actually one of the things I said I wasn't happy with > > either. =) > > Hm, I decide to drop weak arch_find_msi_chip(), no one likes it. > Let's find a better solution :) > > > > >> I'm surprised no one considers the case of a platform having more than one host > >> bridge and possibly more than one MSI unit. With the current proposed patchset I > >> can't see how that would work. > > > > The PCI core can already deal with that. An MSI chip can be set per bus > > and the weak pcibios_add_bus() can be used to set that. Often it might > > not even be necessary to do it via pcibios_add_bus() if you create the > > root bus directly, since you can attach the MSI chip at that time. > > Yes, PCI hostbridge driver find the matched msi chip during its initialization, > and assign the msi chip to PCI bus in pcibios_add_bus(). > > > > >> What I would like to see is a way of creating the pci_host_bridge structure outside > >> the pci_create_root_bus(). That would then allow us to pass this sort of platform > >> details like associated msi_chip into the host bridge and the child busses will > >> have an easy way of finding the information needed by finding the root bus and then > >> the host bridge structure. Then the generic pci_scan_root_bus() can be used by (mostly) > >> everyone and the drivers can remove their kludges that try to work around the > >> current limitations. > > So I think maybe save msi chip in PCI arch sysdata is a good candidate. Except that arch sysdata at the moment is an opaque pointer. I am all in favour in changing the type of sysdata from void* into pci_host_bridge* and arches can wrap their old sysdata around the pci_host_bridge*. Best regards, Liviu > > > > > I think both issues are orthogonal. Last time I checked a lot of work > > was still necessary to unify host bridges enough so that it could be > > shared across architectures. But perhaps some of that work has > > happened in the meantime. > > > > But like I said, when you create the root bus, you can easily attach the > > MSI chip to it. > > > > Thierry > > > > > -- > Thanks! > Yijing > > -- ------------------- .oooO ( ) \ ( Oooo. \_) ( ) ) / (_/ One small step for me ...