From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60242C31E4C for ; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 09:06:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3970921473 for ; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 09:06:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726924AbfFNJGu (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jun 2019 05:06:50 -0400 Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.190]:18571 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725985AbfFNJGu (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jun 2019 05:06:50 -0400 Received: from DGGEMS402-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.60]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 9E9CFE521DB502BA74A4; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 17:03:05 +0800 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.202.227.238) by DGGEMS402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.202) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.439.0; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 17:02:59 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] lib: logic_pio: Use logical PIO low-level accessors for !CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO To: Bjorn Helgaas References: <1560262374-67875-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> <1560262374-67875-2-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> <20190613023947.GD13533@google.com> <8ef228f8-97cb-e40e-ea6b-410b80a845cf@huawei.com> <20190613200932.GJ13533@google.com> CC: , , , , , , , , , , From: John Garry Message-ID: <7495dcab-f293-4b2a-4740-2249f61351f7@huawei.com> Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 10:02:52 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190613200932.GJ13533@google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.202.227.238] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 13/06/2019 21:09, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 10:39:12AM +0100, John Garry wrote: >> On 13/06/2019 03:39, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >>> I'm not sure it's even safe, because CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO depends on >>> ARM64, but PCI_IOBASE is defined on most arches via asm-generic/io.h, >>> so this potentially affects arches other than ARM64. >> >> It would do. It would affect any arch which defines PCI_IOBASE and >> does not have arch-specific definition of inb et all. > Hi Bjorn, > What's the reason for testing PCI_IOBASE instead of > CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO? If there's a reason it's needed, that's fine, > but it does make this much more complicated to review. For ARM64, we have PCI_IOBASE defined but may not have CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO defined. Currently CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO is only selected by CONFIG_HISILICON_LPC. As such, we should make this change also for when CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO is not defined. Thanks, John > > Bjorn > > . > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E15F3C31E44 for ; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 09:06:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC9EC20866 for ; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 09:06:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="XpnSGEcq" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org AC9EC20866 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From: References:To:Subject:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=PS2+LWEo6/6aJQLONR2/PcGeTT1nrkM2xrxJo70Qjhg=; b=XpnSGEcqSe2wakdBaIef8pkRA snaVyM98LSWQeZTQP+eYjmuyv1zxSB8xQFqglYfSACBVick+APs5yz0TOll0inJxOtBvqHEHopbcq rWfM+gbOMNQS+KP/EQybMB+2V+orOcLXRA1t1Cm5/gxuYQKRg2bgSGLwfiuz0f9ZjzscKhcE6QiRa dpwD78hrJyGXQuK/3SDM1VQySnxg8YCRWae/4uNjF/vFy0E3Ct6AdXYTrrBCVyJv3L1Bufl4GGV6c L/v6FonNVxBag8kOZ3r4iFSzt4/B/2MmpoZAxcCelwfso9hQZvIOa4ggQC0pD/0rB4QdLRWBopwdo iL19fVxFA==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hbiAi-0007sx-R9; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 09:06:56 +0000 Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.190] helo=huawei.com) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hbiAf-0007ry-Ic for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 09:06:55 +0000 Received: from DGGEMS402-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.60]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 9E9CFE521DB502BA74A4; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 17:03:05 +0800 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.202.227.238) by DGGEMS402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.202) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.439.0; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 17:02:59 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] lib: logic_pio: Use logical PIO low-level accessors for !CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO To: Bjorn Helgaas References: <1560262374-67875-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> <1560262374-67875-2-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> <20190613023947.GD13533@google.com> <8ef228f8-97cb-e40e-ea6b-410b80a845cf@huawei.com> <20190613200932.GJ13533@google.com> From: John Garry Message-ID: <7495dcab-f293-4b2a-4740-2249f61351f7@huawei.com> Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 10:02:52 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190613200932.GJ13533@google.com> X-Originating-IP: [10.202.227.238] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190614_020653_858792_1AAEFCDA X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 10.69 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net, wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com, arnd@arndb.de, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, will.deacon@arm.com, linuxarm@huawei.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 13/06/2019 21:09, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 10:39:12AM +0100, John Garry wrote: >> On 13/06/2019 03:39, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >>> I'm not sure it's even safe, because CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO depends on >>> ARM64, but PCI_IOBASE is defined on most arches via asm-generic/io.h, >>> so this potentially affects arches other than ARM64. >> >> It would do. It would affect any arch which defines PCI_IOBASE and >> does not have arch-specific definition of inb et all. > Hi Bjorn, > What's the reason for testing PCI_IOBASE instead of > CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO? If there's a reason it's needed, that's fine, > but it does make this much more complicated to review. For ARM64, we have PCI_IOBASE defined but may not have CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO defined. Currently CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO is only selected by CONFIG_HISILICON_LPC. As such, we should make this change also for when CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO is not defined. Thanks, John > > Bjorn > > . > _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel