From: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
To: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "hanjun.guo@linaro.org" <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@arm.com>,
Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@arm.com>,
Yijing Wang <wangyijing@huawei.com>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>, Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@intel.com>,
"lenb @ kernel . org" <lenb@kernel.org>,
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>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Subject: Re: [Patch v4 5/8] ARM64/PCI/ACPI: Introduce struct pci_controller for ACPI
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2015 11:03:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150603100343.GA27917@red-moon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <556ECA93.7040800@linux.intel.com>
On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 10:36:19AM +0100, Jiang Liu wrote:
> On 2015/6/3 16:44, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> > On 2015???06???02??? 17:35, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 07:12:53AM +0100, Jiang Liu wrote:
> >>> From: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
> >>>
> >>> ARM64 ACPI based PCI host bridge init needs a arch dependent
> >>> struct pci_controller to accommodate common PCI host bridge
> >>> code which is introduced later, or it will lead to compile
> >>> errors on ARM64.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
> >>> Tested-by: Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com>
> >>> CC: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> >>> CC: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> >>> CC: Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@arm.com>
> >>> CC: Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com>
> >>> CC: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com>
> >>> ---
> >>> arch/arm64/include/asm/pci.h | 10 ++++++++++
> >>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pci.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pci.h
> >>> index b008a72f8bc0..70884957f253 100644
> >>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pci.h
> >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pci.h
> >>> @@ -10,6 +10,16 @@
> >>> #include <asm-generic/pci-bridge.h>
> >>> #include <asm-generic/pci-dma-compat.h>
> >>>
> >>> +struct acpi_device;
> >>> +
> >>> +struct pci_controller {
> >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> >>> + struct acpi_device *companion; /* ACPI companion device */
> >>> +#endif
> >>> + int segment; /* PCI domain */
> >>> + int node; /* NUMA node */
> >>> +};
> >>
> >> There is nothing ARM64 specific in this structure. The only
> >> reason I see you want to keep it arch specific is the iommu
> >> pointer on x86,
> >
> > And also plarform_data for IA64 too.
> >
> >> but I think we should find a way to make
> >> the common bits shared across archs (ie the struct above) and
> >> add (maybe a void*) to the generic struct to cater for arch
> >> specific data.
> >>
> >> Thoughts ?
> >
> > We discussed this already, it has limitations to make it
> > common to all archs, I think the limitation are:
> >
> > - struct pci_controller are also used for other archs
> > such as PowerPC and Tile, they will not use it for
> > ACPI purpose, so we can not used for all archs.
> >
> > - if we let struct pci_controller defined only for archs
> > using ACPI, such as introduce it in linux/acpi.h, we still
> > can not satisfy that the struct pci_controller is not
> > only used for ACPI case on x86, it will be used for
> > non-ACPI too.
> >
> > So it's pretty difficult to share it with across archs to me,
> > any more ideas?
> Hi Hanjun and Lorenzo,
> As mentioned by Hanjun, I have no idea yet about how to
> consolidating "struct pci_controller" further. One possible
> way is to move "struct pci_controller" related code into
> arch, but apparently that will reduce code reusing.
I guess you can't move that struct pci_controller to generic code
since it is present on other archs too (with completely different
members).
What you can do is creating a new struct (ie same purpose of pci_controller
with a different name) common to all archs that contains the common bits
+ a void* data that contains arch specific data, and convert x86 and ia64
to using it.
It is weird to be forced to declare a pci_controller structure in arm64
code with 0 arch specific data in it.
Lorenzo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-03 10:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-02 6:12 [Patch v4 0/8] Consolidate ACPI PCI root common code into ACPI core Jiang Liu
2015-06-02 6:12 ` [Patch v4 1/8] ACPI/PCI: Enhance ACPI core to support sparse IO space Jiang Liu
2015-06-02 6:12 ` [Patch v4 2/8] ia64/PCI/ACPI: Use common ACPI resource parsing interface for host bridge Jiang Liu
2015-06-02 6:12 ` [Patch v4 3/8] ia64/PCI: Use common struct resource_entry to replace struct iospace_resource Jiang Liu
2015-06-02 6:12 ` [Patch v4 4/8] x86/PCI: Rename struct pci_sysdata as struct pci_controller Jiang Liu
2015-06-02 6:12 ` [Patch v4 5/8] ARM64/PCI/ACPI: Introduce struct pci_controller for ACPI Jiang Liu
2015-06-02 9:35 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-06-03 8:44 ` Hanjun Guo
2015-06-03 9:36 ` Jiang Liu
2015-06-03 10:03 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi [this message]
2015-06-03 10:21 ` Jiang Liu
2015-06-03 12:49 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-06-02 6:12 ` [Patch v4 6/8] PCI/ACPI: Consolidate common PCI host bridge code into ACPI core Jiang Liu
2015-06-02 6:12 ` [Patch v4 7/8] x86/PCI/ACPI: Use common interface to support PCI host bridge Jiang Liu
2015-06-02 6:12 ` [Patch v4 8/8] ia64/PCI/ACPI: " Jiang Liu
2015-06-02 6:46 ` [Patch v4 0/8] Consolidate ACPI PCI root common code into ACPI core Hanjun Guo
2015-06-03 20:27 ` Al Stone
2015-06-04 1:54 ` Jiang Liu
2015-06-04 6:31 ` Hanjun Guo
2015-06-04 6:41 ` Jiang Liu
2015-06-04 7:02 ` Hanjun Guo
2015-06-04 15:51 ` Mark Salter
2015-06-04 16:29 ` Jiang Liu
2015-06-04 16:57 ` Mark Salter
2015-06-08 3:59 ` Hanjun Guo
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=20150603100343.GA27917@red-moon \
--to=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=Catalin.Marinas@arm.com \
--cc=Liviu.Dudau@arm.com \
--cc=Marc.Zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=Will.Deacon@arm.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=hanjun.guo@linaro.org \
--cc=jiang.liu@linux.intel.com \
--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=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: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).