From: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com> To: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> Cc: "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@arm.com>, "hanjun.guo@linaro.org" <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>, Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@arm.com>, Yijing Wang <wangyijing@huawei.com>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>, Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@intel.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>, "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>, "x86 @ kernel . org" <x86@kernel.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org> Subject: Re: [Patch v5 4/6] PCI/ACPI: Consolidate common PCI host bridge code into ACPI core Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 00:58:15 +0800 [thread overview] Message-ID: <55771B27.1060509@linux.intel.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20150609161230.GC8591@red-moon> On 2015/6/10 0:12, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 05:20:46PM +0100, Jiang Liu wrote: > > [...] > >> +static int acpi_pci_probe_root_resources(struct acpi_pci_root_info *info) >> +{ >> + int ret; >> + struct list_head *list = &info->resources; >> + struct acpi_device *device = info->bridge; >> + struct resource_entry *entry, *tmp; >> + unsigned long flags; >> + >> + flags = IORESOURCE_IO | IORESOURCE_MEM | IORESOURCE_MEM_8AND16BIT; > > Is IORESOURCE_MEM_8AND16BIT required because of some pending patches > that will change ACPI resource filtering ? It does not seem to make > a difference in the mainline code, AFAICT. Hi Lorenzo, Sorry, the 'IORESOURCE_MEM_8AND16BIT' is leaked into this patch from another bugfix patch. It should be removed. >> +static void acpi_pci_root_release_info(struct pci_host_bridge *bridge) >> +{ >> + struct resource *res; >> + struct resource_entry *entry; >> + >> + resource_list_for_each_entry(entry, &bridge->windows) { >> + res = entry->res; >> + if (res->parent && >> + (res->flags & (IORESOURCE_MEM | IORESOURCE_IO))) >> + release_resource(res); >> + } > > It is a question: is this loop necessary given that we are already > releasing resources in __acpi_pci_root_release_info() ? Function pci_create_root_bus() moves resources from info->resources list onto bridge->windows list, so an ACPI resource will be either on info->resources or bridge->windows. Thus we need to deal with both info->resources and bridge->windows. > >> + __acpi_pci_root_release_info(bridge->release_data); >> +} >> + >> +struct pci_bus *acpi_pci_root_create(struct acpi_pci_root *root, >> + struct acpi_pci_root_ops *ops, >> + struct acpi_pci_root_info *info, >> + void *sysdata, int segment, int node) > > I do not think you need to pass segment and node, they clutter the > function signature when you can retrieve them from root, I would > make them local variables and use root->segment and acpi_get_node > in the function body to retrieve them. On x86, node and segment may be overridden under certain conditions. For example, segment will always be 0 if 'pci_ignore_seg' is set. >> +{ >> + int ret, busnum = root->secondary.start; >> + struct acpi_device *device = root->device; >> + struct pci_bus *bus; >> + >> + info->root = root; >> + info->bridge = device; >> + info->ops = ops; >> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&info->resources); >> + snprintf(info->name, sizeof(info->name), "PCI Bus %04x:%02x", >> + segment, busnum); >> + >> + if (ops->init_info && ops->init_info(info)) >> + goto out_release_info; >> + ret = acpi_pci_probe_root_resources(info); >> + if (ops->prepare_resources) >> + ret = ops->prepare_resources(info, ret); > > You go through this ret passing song and dance because we may want to > call prepare_resources even if acpi_pci_probe_root_resource failed (on > x86), correct ? I will have a further look at x86 and ia64 if we > can consolidate these ops function hooks even further. Yes. X86 uses flag 'pci_use_crs' to choose ACPI parsed resources or other method parsed resources. This provides user a way to work around some bios issues. Thanks! Gerry
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: jiang.liu@linux.intel.com (Jiang Liu) To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: [Patch v5 4/6] PCI/ACPI: Consolidate common PCI host bridge code into ACPI core Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 00:58:15 +0800 [thread overview] Message-ID: <55771B27.1060509@linux.intel.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20150609161230.GC8591@red-moon> On 2015/6/10 0:12, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > On Mon, Jun 08, 2015 at 05:20:46PM +0100, Jiang Liu wrote: > > [...] > >> +static int acpi_pci_probe_root_resources(struct acpi_pci_root_info *info) >> +{ >> + int ret; >> + struct list_head *list = &info->resources; >> + struct acpi_device *device = info->bridge; >> + struct resource_entry *entry, *tmp; >> + unsigned long flags; >> + >> + flags = IORESOURCE_IO | IORESOURCE_MEM | IORESOURCE_MEM_8AND16BIT; > > Is IORESOURCE_MEM_8AND16BIT required because of some pending patches > that will change ACPI resource filtering ? It does not seem to make > a difference in the mainline code, AFAICT. Hi Lorenzo, Sorry, the 'IORESOURCE_MEM_8AND16BIT' is leaked into this patch from another bugfix patch. It should be removed. >> +static void acpi_pci_root_release_info(struct pci_host_bridge *bridge) >> +{ >> + struct resource *res; >> + struct resource_entry *entry; >> + >> + resource_list_for_each_entry(entry, &bridge->windows) { >> + res = entry->res; >> + if (res->parent && >> + (res->flags & (IORESOURCE_MEM | IORESOURCE_IO))) >> + release_resource(res); >> + } > > It is a question: is this loop necessary given that we are already > releasing resources in __acpi_pci_root_release_info() ? Function pci_create_root_bus() moves resources from info->resources list onto bridge->windows list, so an ACPI resource will be either on info->resources or bridge->windows. Thus we need to deal with both info->resources and bridge->windows. > >> + __acpi_pci_root_release_info(bridge->release_data); >> +} >> + >> +struct pci_bus *acpi_pci_root_create(struct acpi_pci_root *root, >> + struct acpi_pci_root_ops *ops, >> + struct acpi_pci_root_info *info, >> + void *sysdata, int segment, int node) > > I do not think you need to pass segment and node, they clutter the > function signature when you can retrieve them from root, I would > make them local variables and use root->segment and acpi_get_node > in the function body to retrieve them. On x86, node and segment may be overridden under certain conditions. For example, segment will always be 0 if 'pci_ignore_seg' is set. >> +{ >> + int ret, busnum = root->secondary.start; >> + struct acpi_device *device = root->device; >> + struct pci_bus *bus; >> + >> + info->root = root; >> + info->bridge = device; >> + info->ops = ops; >> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&info->resources); >> + snprintf(info->name, sizeof(info->name), "PCI Bus %04x:%02x", >> + segment, busnum); >> + >> + if (ops->init_info && ops->init_info(info)) >> + goto out_release_info; >> + ret = acpi_pci_probe_root_resources(info); >> + if (ops->prepare_resources) >> + ret = ops->prepare_resources(info, ret); > > You go through this ret passing song and dance because we may want to > call prepare_resources even if acpi_pci_probe_root_resource failed (on > x86), correct ? I will have a further look at x86 and ia64 if we > can consolidate these ops function hooks even further. Yes. X86 uses flag 'pci_use_crs' to choose ACPI parsed resources or other method parsed resources. This provides user a way to work around some bios issues. Thanks! Gerry
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-09 16:58 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2015-06-08 16:20 [Patch v5 0/6] Consolidate ACPI PCI root common code into ACPI core Jiang Liu 2015-06-08 16:20 ` Jiang Liu 2015-06-08 16:20 ` [Patch v5 1/6] ACPI/PCI: Enhance ACPI core to support sparse IO space Jiang Liu 2015-06-08 16:20 ` Jiang Liu 2015-07-29 20:37 ` Bjorn Helgaas 2015-07-29 20:37 ` Bjorn Helgaas 2015-09-09 6:38 ` Jiang Liu 2015-09-09 6:38 ` Jiang Liu 2015-09-09 14:54 ` Bjorn Helgaas 2015-09-09 14:54 ` Bjorn Helgaas 2015-06-08 16:20 ` [Patch v5 2/6] ia64/PCI/ACPI: Use common ACPI resource parsing interface for host bridge Jiang Liu 2015-06-08 16:20 ` Jiang Liu 2015-06-08 16:20 ` Jiang Liu 2015-06-08 16:20 ` [Patch v5 3/6] ia64/PCI: Use common struct resource_entry to replace struct iospace_resource Jiang Liu 2015-06-08 16:20 ` Jiang Liu 2015-06-08 16:20 ` Jiang Liu 2015-06-08 16:20 ` [Patch v5 4/6] PCI/ACPI: Consolidate common PCI host bridge code into ACPI core Jiang Liu 2015-06-08 16:20 ` Jiang Liu 2015-06-09 16:12 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2015-06-09 16:12 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2015-06-09 16:12 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2015-06-09 16:58 ` Jiang Liu [this message] 2015-06-09 16:58 ` Jiang Liu 2015-06-09 16:58 ` Jiang Liu 2015-06-10 16:48 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2015-06-10 16:48 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2015-06-10 16:48 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2015-06-10 17:19 ` Jiang Liu 2015-06-10 17:19 ` Jiang Liu 2015-06-10 17:19 ` Jiang Liu 2015-06-11 16:18 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2015-06-11 16:18 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2015-06-11 16:18 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2015-07-29 20:54 ` Bjorn Helgaas 2015-07-29 20:54 ` Bjorn Helgaas 2015-07-29 20:54 ` Bjorn Helgaas 2015-07-29 20:24 ` Bjorn Helgaas 2015-07-29 20:24 ` Bjorn Helgaas 2015-06-08 16:20 ` [Patch v5 5/6] x86/PCI/ACPI: Use common interface to support PCI host bridge Jiang Liu 2015-06-08 16:20 ` Jiang Liu 2015-06-08 16:20 ` [Patch v5 6/6] ia64/PCI/ACPI: " Jiang Liu 2015-06-08 16:20 ` Jiang Liu 2015-06-08 16:20 ` Jiang Liu 2015-07-29 12:17 ` [Patch v5 0/6] Consolidate ACPI PCI root common code into ACPI core Hanjun Guo 2015-07-29 12:17 ` Hanjun Guo 2015-07-29 20:30 ` Bjorn Helgaas 2015-07-29 20:30 ` Bjorn Helgaas 2015-07-30 7:58 ` Jiang Liu 2015-07-30 7:58 ` Jiang Liu
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=55771B27.1060509@linux.intel.com \ --to=jiang.liu@linux.intel.com \ --cc=Liviu.Dudau@arm.com \ --cc=Marc.Zyngier@arm.com \ --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \ --cc=hanjun.guo@linaro.org \ --cc=lenb@kernel.org \ --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \ --cc=lv.zheng@intel.com \ --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \ --cc=wangyijing@huawei.com \ --cc=x86@kernel.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.