| Message ID | 1433225576-8215-6-git-send-email-jiang.liu@linux.intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Delegated to: | Bjorn Helgaas |
| Headers | show |
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, 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 ? Lorenzo > + > #define PCIBIOS_MIN_IO 0x1000 > #define PCIBIOS_MIN_MEM 0 > > -- > 1.7.10.4 > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
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? Thanks Hanjun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
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. Thanks! Gerry > > Thanks > Hanjun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
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 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 2015/6/3 18:03, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > 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. Hi Lorenzo, I have thought to consolidate pci_controller for x86 and ia64, but that will make the change set much more bigger. How about to consolidate pci_controller by another patch set. That will be easier for review. Thanks! Gerry > > Lorenzo > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 11:21:16AM +0100, Jiang Liu wrote: > On 2015/6/3 18:03, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > > 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. > > Hi Lorenzo, > I have thought to consolidate pci_controller for x86 and ia64, > but that will make the change set much more bigger. How about to > consolidate pci_controller by another patch set. That will be easier > for review. Agreed, but with this set you are forcing arm64 to define pci_controller as pci_bus sysdata and I am not really keen on that, there are already function calls in the arm64 pci layer that are there to make ACPI compile and it is a bit annoying, instead of removing them we are adding arch stuff on top. How about passing a void* pointer (ie that is what pci_create_root_bus expects) to acpi_pci_root_create through a member in acpi_pci_root_info (I mean acpi_pci_root_info replaces the controller member with a void* where you can add x86/ia64 pci_controller) ? I understand this forces you to alloc the pci_controller in arch code, but that's not a big deal right ? This way you can drop the pci_controller struct from arm64 (I do not even know if it will ever be needed, by looking at Hanjun's code, the bits of code that need the pci_controller can be moved to generic PCI layer). https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/5/26/215 This way we can add the generic struct we discussed later (pci_controller refactoring), I agree it is going to be a bigger change but at least you do not force something into arm64 that we do not even know if it is required. Thanks anyway for putting this series together. Lorenzo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
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 */ +}; + #define PCIBIOS_MIN_IO 0x1000 #define PCIBIOS_MIN_MEM 0