Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 14 May 2015 12:05:43 +0800 | From | Hanjun Guo <> | Subject | Re: [RFC v2 5/7] PCI/ACPI: Consolidate common PCI host bridge code into ACPI core |
| |
On 2015年05月14日 09:09, Jiang Liu wrote: > On 2015/5/13 21:25, Hanjun Guo wrote: >> On 2015年05月13日 20:24, Jiang Liu wrote: >>> On 2015/5/13 17:29, Hanjun Guo wrote: >>>> Hi Jiang, >>>> >>>> On 2015年05月05日 10:46, Jiang Liu wrote: >>>> >>>> struct pci_controller { >>>> struct acpi_device *companion; >>>> void *iommu; >>>> int segment; >>>> int node; /* nearest node with memory or >>>> NUMA_NO_NODE for global allocation */ >>>> >>>> void *platform_data; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> except void *platform_data; >>>> >>>> On ARM64, the structure is almost the same, so how about >>>> introduce >>>> >>>> struct pci_controller { >>>> struct acpi_device *companion; /* ACPI companion device */ >>>> void *iommu; /* IOMMU private data */ >>>> int segment; /* PCI domain */ >>>> int node; /* NUMA node */ >>>> #ifdef CONFIG_IA64 >>>> void *platform_data; >>>> #endif >>>> }; >>>> >>>> in this file, then can be used for all architectures? >>> Current mode is that architecture defines its own version of >>> struct pci_controller. It would be better to keep this pattern. >> >> OK, thanks for the clarify :) So how about add my basic >> PCI support patch for ARM64 on top of you patch set to fix >> this problem? > > Sure, please send me the patches and I will send out v3 to > cover your review comments.
OK, I need to rework my patches because my patch set is dependent on top of another MMCFG refactor patch set [1], so I need to remove MMCONFIG first then will speed up the upstream process of your patch set, will send you the patches soon.
[1]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/17/29
Thanks Hanjun
| |