On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 06:05:25PM +0000, Liviu Dudau wrote:
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 05:38:21PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 06:05:27PM +0000, Liviu Dudau wrote:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 05:38:08PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Friday 14 March 2014, Catalin Marinas wrote:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 03:34:18PM +0000, Liviu Dudau wrote:
--- /dev/null +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
[...]
+int pci_register_io_range(phys_addr_t address, resource_size_t size)
[...]
+unsigned long pci_address_to_pio(phys_addr_t address)
[...]
+void pcibios_fixup_bus(struct pci_bus *bus)
[ actually most of this file ]
Maybe it was raised before already but can we have __weak generic definitions of these functions? They don't seem to be arm64 specific in any way.
[...]
Catalin, if you are happy to ask for ACKs from all arch maintainers that might get affected by our custom version of pci_address_to_pio() before you can pull PCI support for arm64 then I can propose a new patchset.
You don't need to change the other architectures, that's the point of a __weak definition, it will be automatically overridden. If you want, you can even place a GENERIC_PCI or whatever config option that is only selected by arm64 for the time being.
pci_address_to_pio() is alread __weak. My patch was adding the arm64 version of it. Adding an #ifdef GENERIC_PCI to the __weak implementation is not just a temporary solution.
Ah, I start to understand what you mean, pci_address_to_pio() is already defined as __weak in drivers/of/address.c. So the reason we redefine it on arm64 is that it uses the io_list resources which are populated by pci_register_io_range(). Do you see any other architecture using a similar logic (that could be shared)?
Any other functions in this file that could be shared (and are not __weak already)?