On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 01:30:31PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tuesday 01 July 2014 21:45:09 Liviu Dudau wrote:
On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 09:36:10PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tuesday 01 July 2014 19:43:28 Liviu Dudau wrote:
This still conflicts with the other allocator you have in patch 9 for pci_remap_iospace: nothing guarantees that the mapping is the same for both.
Also, this is a completely pointless exercise at this moment, because nobody cares about the result of pci_address_to_pio on architectures that don't already provide this function. If we ever get a proper Open Firmware implementation that wants to put hardcoded PCI devices into DT, we can add an implementation, but for now this seems overkill.
The allocator in pci_register_io_range seems reasonable, why not merge this function with pci_remap_iospace() as I have asked you multiple times before? Just make it return the io_offset so the caller can put that into the PCI host resources.
Hi Arnd,
While I agree with you that at some moment the allocators were inconsistent wrt each other, for this version I would respectfully disagree on this. The allocator in pci_register_io_range() only makes sure that the ranges are not overlapping, it doesn't do any mapping whatsoever, while pci_remap_iospace() does only an ioremap_page_range(). The idea is that you get the offset out of pci_address_to_pio() and apply it to pci_remap_iospace().
Ok, got it now, I'm sorry I didn't read this properly at first.
Your solution looks correct to me, just using different tradeoffs to what I was expecting: You get a working pci_address_to_pio() function, which is probably never needed, but in turn you need to keep the state of each host bridge in a global list.
Just a reminder that with my patchset I *do* start using pci_address_to_pio() in order to correctly parse the IO ranges from DT.
Best regards, Liviu
Arnd