lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Dec]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/4] PCI: iproc: Add Broadcom iProc PCIe driver


On 12/12/2014 9:21 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday 12 December 2014 09:08:48 Ray Jui wrote:
>>
>> On 12/12/2014 4:29 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> Doesn't Hauke's driver depends on BCMA? In that case, how does it work
>> on the SoCs that do not have the IP block to support BCMA?
>
> I hadn't realized that there are some SoCs that are not BCMA based.
> As the host controller implementation is closely related, we will
> have to come up with some solution.
>
I agree with you that we should have a common PCIe host driver which
supports all iProc SoCs, BCM4708, BCM5301X, and some other similar SoCs.

> One way to solve this would be by turning the driver into a library
> the same way as the pcie-dw driver, and have separate front-ends
> for it for platform_device and bcma_device.
>
I'm fine with this solution, i.e., to introduce a common pcie-iproc core
driver (just like pcie-designware) and have different front-ends
depending on the device/bus type. If we end up deciding to go with this
solution, I need to discuss with Hauke to come up with a plan to
collaborate.

But before we choose to go with that route, may I ask, what is the
purpose of tying a PCIe host driver to BCMA? What benefit does BCMA give
us? If we have a generic platform based PCIe driver that can work on all
iProc SoCs + BCM4708 and BCM5301X with all HW specific configurations
taken care of by device tree, why do we still need to use BCMA?

I thought all a BCMA device here does is to auto-instantiate based on
some register readings?


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-12-15 20:41    [W:0.076 / U:0.252 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site