[PATCH 0/9] powerpc/pci: clean up direct access to sysdata

[PATCH 0/9] powerpc/pci: clean up direct access to sysdata

[Kumar Gala]

We shouldn't be accessing sysdata directly.  In the future we might have
sysdata be a device_node on ppc32 to match ppc64.  Direct access would make that
a bit difficult.

If someone can look at the iseries code I would appreciate that:

arch/powerpc/platforms/iseries/pci.c:           iomm_table[current_iomm_table_entry] = dev->sysdata;
arch/powerpc/platforms/iseries/pci.c:                   iseries_ds_addr(dev->sysdata) | (bar_num << 24);
arch/powerpc/platforms/iseries/pci.c:   pdev->sysdata = node;

- k

Re: [PATCH 0/9] powerpc/pci: clean up direct access to sysdata

[Michael Ellerman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 929 bytes --]

On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 08:09 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
> We shouldn't be accessing sysdata directly.  In the future we might have
> sysdata be a device_node on ppc32 to match ppc64.  Direct access would make that
> a bit difficult.
> 
> If someone can look at the iseries code I would appreciate that:
> 
> arch/powerpc/platforms/iseries/pci.c:           iomm_table[current_iomm_table_entry] = dev->sysdata;
> arch/powerpc/platforms/iseries/pci.c:                   iseries_ds_addr(dev->sysdata) | (bar_num << 24);
> arch/powerpc/platforms/iseries/pci.c:   pdev->sysdata = node;

It looks like it's basically doing the same logic as
pci_device_to_OF_node(), and fetch_dev_dn(), but there's probably some
reason why it's not using those.

Given how much new iseries hardware there is, I think we'd probably
rather leave the code as is. It's a device node anyway, so it doesn't
block your plans RE ppc32.

cheers

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 0/9] powerpc/pci: clean up direct access to sysdata

[Kumar Gala]

On Apr 30, 2009, at 8:49 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:

> On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 08:09 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> We shouldn't be accessing sysdata directly.  In the future we might  
>> have
>> sysdata be a device_node on ppc32 to match ppc64.  Direct access  
>> would make that
>> a bit difficult.
>>
>> If someone can look at the iseries code I would appreciate that:
>>
>> arch/powerpc/platforms/iseries/pci.c:            
>> iomm_table[current_iomm_table_entry] = dev->sysdata;
>> arch/powerpc/platforms/iseries/pci.c:                    
>> iseries_ds_addr(dev->sysdata) | (bar_num << 24);
>> arch/powerpc/platforms/iseries/pci.c:   pdev->sysdata = node;
>
> It looks like it's basically doing the same logic as
> pci_device_to_OF_node(), and fetch_dev_dn(), but there's probably some
> reason why it's not using those.
>
> Given how much new iseries hardware there is, I think we'd probably
> rather leave the code as is. It's a device node anyway, so it doesn't
> block your plans RE ppc32.
>
> cheers

I was already thinking along those lines, but figured I see if anyone  
is really "maintaining" iseries code :)

- k

Re: [PATCH 0/9] powerpc/pci: clean up direct access to sysdata

[Michael Ellerman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1349 bytes --]

On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 09:18 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
> On Apr 30, 2009, at 8:49 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 08:09 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
> >> We shouldn't be accessing sysdata directly.  In the future we might  
> >> have
> >> sysdata be a device_node on ppc32 to match ppc64.  Direct access  
> >> would make that
> >> a bit difficult.
> >>
> >> If someone can look at the iseries code I would appreciate that:
> >>
> >> arch/powerpc/platforms/iseries/pci.c:            
> >> iomm_table[current_iomm_table_entry] = dev->sysdata;
> >> arch/powerpc/platforms/iseries/pci.c:                    
> >> iseries_ds_addr(dev->sysdata) | (bar_num << 24);
> >> arch/powerpc/platforms/iseries/pci.c:   pdev->sysdata = node;
> >
> > It looks like it's basically doing the same logic as
> > pci_device_to_OF_node(), and fetch_dev_dn(), but there's probably some
> > reason why it's not using those.
> >
> > Given how much new iseries hardware there is, I think we'd probably
> > rather leave the code as is. It's a device node anyway, so it doesn't
> > block your plans RE ppc32.
> >
> > cheers
> 
> I was already thinking along those lines, but figured I see if anyone  
> is really "maintaining" iseries code :)

Not that much, it would be sfr if anyone, but I think he's a bit busy :)

cheers

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 0/9] powerpc/pci: clean up direct access to sysdata

[Kumar Gala]

On Apr 30, 2009, at 9:50 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:

> On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 09:18 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> On Apr 30, 2009, at 8:49 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 08:09 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
>>>> We shouldn't be accessing sysdata directly.  In the future we might
>>>> have
>>>> sysdata be a device_node on ppc32 to match ppc64.  Direct access
>>>> would make that
>>>> a bit difficult.
>>>>
>>>> If someone can look at the iseries code I would appreciate that:
>>>>
>>>> arch/powerpc/platforms/iseries/pci.c:
>>>> iomm_table[current_iomm_table_entry] = dev->sysdata;
>>>> arch/powerpc/platforms/iseries/pci.c:
>>>> iseries_ds_addr(dev->sysdata) | (bar_num << 24);
>>>> arch/powerpc/platforms/iseries/pci.c:   pdev->sysdata = node;
>>>
>>> It looks like it's basically doing the same logic as
>>> pci_device_to_OF_node(), and fetch_dev_dn(), but there's probably  
>>> some
>>> reason why it's not using those.
>>>
>>> Given how much new iseries hardware there is, I think we'd probably
>>> rather leave the code as is. It's a device node anyway, so it  
>>> doesn't
>>> block your plans RE ppc32.
>>>
>>> cheers
>>
>> I was already thinking along those lines, but figured I see if anyone
>> is really "maintaining" iseries code :)
>
> Not that much, it would be sfr if anyone, but I think he's a bit  
> busy :)
>
> cheers

I was thinking about this a bit more and would like to clean up  
iseries as well.  Either iseries is maintained by someone or its not.

- k