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=-12.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, 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 D3D1CC432BE for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 12:20:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C15FE604D7 for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 12:20:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238829AbhHSMVJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Aug 2021 08:21:09 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:41312 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S237873AbhHSMVI (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Aug 2021 08:21:08 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-xd2f.google.com (mail-io1-xd2f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3163DC061575; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 05:20:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-xd2f.google.com with SMTP id q16so7480682ioj.0; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 05:20:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=Do67dFDalPXC/TBAwcwK7Vkc73BP6/f3MSt05MrUV7Y=; b=gj28CVr9r8QzT93IRDPL1VID94K/rknU8pKdezfbSb05k2kFh7NSLJdDv7S7lzQFZP abgAfMSZA+S5Vywp1gJrx4mGI8d8sYgrSXYimE8nKZqarPSZQcoTUP59VTnvTHup6kdk Bq3XVk5/qlBDN1fxth3Ip8b2ZE2IygGBd6YBnD00ZjWh81lyHxan2Cgmqoz6X5/y8/XD Zdkhi/+8PGyrLTKPeTvyTBKwTkQRucRvN6a82qPa7E9kQhjg0KlUebKddPU+LiJOu15C hUBiBgox4PYStSeOwMRNzgIWlFE7bHX4BGqvFwdIkrbg8hI3wReDSoH6Znrb2RhIYuiX ZguQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=Do67dFDalPXC/TBAwcwK7Vkc73BP6/f3MSt05MrUV7Y=; b=dkJe+/AC9S09/lGcUuMVv/eOK/vcRJejYhD1Znj+9E3zxSMSEQsJMkQEZG7erl6BJh FBYgpbouZEUkwg5TcTu3LcX/n0mTl/kckwCYRVTjxWYJbcu/YHo8TG0VF+oPZ+VTo+/v cfW0DuDL+kY+MzBaFfQA19i+xwh4yUvR5nUoEib5wn3nM6an3kthrsM18pm2DBAyrYWx a2Y1Y5yBMU1qi4byMNLdquHCMJ6o0QdVglqMGBRJXboE7+z/ZrkWt9pwEDegPQahCmiu RnBwfAgX/KH3ojWQ/K4VwZrfD6DrGHWJW2CxyIbY0FQUkhhuPkoxPsLUQ5L4ayA5q57u GyCw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530OARj6pgSjWDyGmNQUxvhvOOm2zJcih2pE3zIXVM+I9H8VJWOp wgYZaVJSFPZTOIOKZwKkq6w= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxTwiLgcwvR1OgCmYboO65XwnHr8NHGjoLeaH5Rci9AAvqYTz3Fyj8vuhbA0MsCgNZ6ri4kzg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6638:521:: with SMTP id j1mr12636185jar.122.1629375631499; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 05:20:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from auth1-smtp.messagingengine.com (auth1-smtp.messagingengine.com. [66.111.4.227]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p18sm1507223iop.47.2021.08.19.05.20.29 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 19 Aug 2021 05:20:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailauth.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74AD227C0054; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 08:20:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 19 Aug 2021 08:20:29 -0400 X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvtddrleejgdehtdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujgesthdtredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepuehoqhhunhcu hfgvnhhguceosghoqhhunhdrfhgvnhhgsehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpeevieejtdfhieejfeduheehvdevgedugeethefggfdtvdeutdevgeetvddvfeeg tdenucffohhmrghinhepkhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd enucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepsghoqhhunhdomhgvshhmthhprghuthhhphgv rhhsohhnrghlihhthidqieelvdeghedtieegqddujeejkeehheehvddqsghoqhhunhdrfh gvnhhgpeepghhmrghilhdrtghomhesfhhigihmvgdrnhgrmhgv X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 08:20:27 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2021 20:19:54 +0800 From: Boqun Feng To: Lorenzo Pieralisi Cc: Bjorn Helgaas , Arnd Bergmann , Marc Zyngier , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , "K. Y. Srinivasan" , Haiyang Zhang , Stephen Hemminger , Wei Liu , Dexuan Cui , Rob Herring , Krzysztof =?utf-8?Q?Wilczy=C5=84ski?= , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Sunil Muthuswamy , Mike Rapoport Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 8/8] PCI: hv: Turn on the host bridge probing on ARM64 Message-ID: References: <20210726180657.142727-1-boqun.feng@gmail.com> <20210726180657.142727-9-boqun.feng@gmail.com> <20210803171451.GA15466@lpieralisi> <20210809155343.GA31511@lpieralisi> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210809155343.GA31511@lpieralisi> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 04:53:43PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 10:38:48PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 06:14:51PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 02:06:57AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > > > > Now we have everything we need, just provide a proper sysdata type for > > > > the bus to use on ARM64 and everything else works. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng > > > > --- > > > > drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c | 7 +++++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c b/drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c > > > > index e6276aaa4659..62dbe98d1fe1 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c > > > > @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ > > > > #include > > > > #include > > > > #include > > > > +#include > > > > #include > > > > #include > > > > #include > > > > @@ -448,7 +449,11 @@ enum hv_pcibus_state { > > > > }; > > > > > > > > struct hv_pcibus_device { > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86 > > > > struct pci_sysdata sysdata; > > > > +#elif defined(CONFIG_ARM64) > > > > + struct pci_config_window sysdata; > > > > > > This is ugly. HV does not need pci_config_window at all right > > > (other than arm64 pcibios_root_bridge_prepare()) ? > > > > > > > Right. > > > > > The issue is that in HV you have to have *some* sysdata != NULL, it is > > > just some data to retrieve the hv_pcibus_device. > > > > > > Mmaybe we can rework ARM64 ACPI code to store the acpi_device in struct > > > pci_host_bridge->private instead of retrieving it from pci_config_window > > > so that we decouple HV from the ARM64 back-end. > > > > > > HV would just set struct pci_host_bridge->private == NULL. > > > > > > > Works for me, but please note that pci_sysdata is an x86-specific > > structure, so we still need to define a fake pci_sysdata inside > > pci-hyperv.c, like: > > > > #ifndef CONFIG_X86 > > struct pci_sysdata { }; > > #end > > > > > I need to think about this a bit, I don't think it should block > > > this series though but it would be nicer. > > > > After a quick look into the code, seems that what we need to do is to > > add an additional parameter for acpi_pci_root_create() and introduce a > > slightly different version of pci_create_root_bus(). A question is: > > should we only do this for ARM64, or should we also do this for > > other acpi_pci_root_create() users (x86 and ia64)? Another question > > comes to my mind is, while we are at it, is there anything else that we > > want to move from sysdata to ->private? These questions are out of scope > > of this patchset, I think. Maybe it's better that we address them in the > > future, and I can send out separate RFC patches to start the discussion. > > Does that sound like a plan to you? > > Yes it does and we can start from ARM64 - what I really don't like > is the arch/arm64 dependency with the HV controller driver as I > described, being forced to have a struct pci_config_window in the > driver is not really nice or clean IMO. > > Not that I expect any other PCI host bridge driver with ACPI coming > anytime soon but even if it is not within set (that we can merge) I'd > like to see the decoupling rework done asap, let me put it this way. > Just want to check whether the following is a good starter for the decoupling rework? https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210811153619.88922-1-boqun.feng@gmail.com/ If so, is there any other concern about taking this patchset? ;-) Regards, Boqun > Thanks, > Lorenzo > > > Regards, > > Boqun > > > > > > > > Lorenzo > > > > > > > +#endif > > > > struct pci_host_bridge *bridge; > > > > struct fwnode_handle *fwnode; > > > > /* Protocol version negotiated with the host */ > > > > @@ -3075,7 +3080,9 @@ static int hv_pci_probe(struct hv_device *hdev, > > > > dom_req, dom); > > > > > > > > hbus->bridge->domain_nr = dom; > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86 > > > > hbus->sysdata.domain = dom; > > > > +#endif > > > > > > > > hbus->hdev = hdev; > > > > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&hbus->children); > > > > -- > > > > 2.32.0 > > > >