On 02.06.2016 14:32, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Thursday, June 2, 2016 2:07:43 PM CEST Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
On 02.06.2016 13:42, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Thursday, June 2, 2016 10:41:01 AM CEST Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
+struct pci_ecam_ops *pci_mcfg_get_ops(struct acpi_pci_root *root) +{
int bus_num = root->secondary.start;int domain = root->segment;struct pci_cfg_fixup *f;if (!mcfg_table)return &pci_generic_ecam_ops;/** Match against platform specific quirks and return corresponding* CAM ops.** First match against PCI topology <domain:bus> then use OEM ID and* OEM revision from MCFG table standard header.*/for (f = __start_acpi_mcfg_fixups; f < __end_acpi_mcfg_fixups; f++) {if ((f->domain == domain || f->domain == PCI_MCFG_DOMAIN_ANY) &&(f->bus_num == bus_num || f->bus_num == PCI_MCFG_BUS_ANY) &&(!strncmp(f->oem_id, mcfg_table->header.oem_id,ACPI_OEM_ID_SIZE)) &&(f->oem_revision == mcfg_table->header.oem_revision))return f->ops;}/* No quirks, use ECAM */return &pci_generic_ecam_ops;+}
- int pci_mcfg_lookup(struct acpi_pci_root *root)
Can you explain the use of pci_ecam_ops instead of pci_ops here?
I wanted to get associated bus_shift and use it to setup configuration region properly before calling pci_ecam_create. Please see next patch.
I see. It feels really odd to do it this way though, since having a nonstandard bus_shift essentially means not using anything resembling ECAM to start with.
I realize that a lot of the host bridges are not ECAM, but because of this, it would be more logical to have their own pci_ops instead of pci_ecam_ops.
Well, we have bus_shift there to express bus shift differentiation. So I would say we should change just structure name to prevent misunderstanding.
Thanks, Tomasz