| Message ID | 1314167063-15785-2-git-send-email-dengcheng.zhu@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Delegated to: | Bjorn Helgaas |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 12:24 AM, Deng-Cheng Zhu <dengcheng.zhu@gmail.com> wrote: > Use this new style (instead of filling in the pci_bus->resource[] array > directly) to hide some ugly implementation details. > > Signed-off-by: Deng-Cheng Zhu <dengcheng.zhu@gmail.com> > --- > arch/mips/pci/pci.c | 11 +++++++++-- > 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/mips/pci/pci.c b/arch/mips/pci/pci.c > index 33bba7b..7473214 100644 > --- a/arch/mips/pci/pci.c > +++ b/arch/mips/pci/pci.c > @@ -261,6 +261,14 @@ static void pcibios_fixup_device_resources(struct pci_dev *dev, > } > } > > +static void __devinit > +pcibios_setup_root_resources(struct pci_bus *bus, struct pci_controller *ctrl) > +{ > + pci_bus_remove_resources(bus); > + pci_bus_add_resource(bus, ctrl->io_resource, 0); > + pci_bus_add_resource(bus, ctrl->mem_resource, 0); > +} > + > void __devinit pcibios_fixup_bus(struct pci_bus *bus) > { > /* Propagate hose info into the subordinate devices. */ > @@ -270,8 +278,7 @@ void __devinit pcibios_fixup_bus(struct pci_bus *bus) > struct pci_dev *dev = bus->self; > > if (!dev) { > - bus->resource[0] = hose->io_resource; > - bus->resource[1] = hose->mem_resource; > + pcibios_setup_root_resources(bus, hose); > } else if (pci_probe_only && > (dev->class >> 8) == PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_PCI) { > pci_read_bridge_bases(bus); I don't understand this patch. Wouldn't it be enough to have [PATCH 2/3], which adds the pci_create_bus() argument with nobody using it yet, then [PATCH 3/3], which makes mips supply the new argument, and add a hunk to [PATCH 3/3] that completely removes the bus->resource fixups in pcibios_fixup_bus() at the same time? Bjorn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
2011/8/24 Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>: > Wouldn't it be enough to have [PATCH 2/3], which adds the > pci_create_bus() argument with nobody using it yet, then [PATCH 3/3], > which makes mips supply the new argument, and add a hunk to [PATCH > 3/3] that completely removes the bus->resource fixups in > pcibios_fixup_bus() at the same time? > > Bjorn > Do you mean to merge this patch to [PATCH 3/3]? OK, that's good! Deng-Cheng -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 12:41 AM, Deng-Cheng Zhu <dengcheng.zhu@gmail.com> wrote: > 2011/8/24 Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>: >> Wouldn't it be enough to have [PATCH 2/3], which adds the >> pci_create_bus() argument with nobody using it yet, then [PATCH 3/3], >> which makes mips supply the new argument, and add a hunk to [PATCH >> 3/3] that completely removes the bus->resource fixups in >> pcibios_fixup_bus() at the same time? >> >> Bjorn >> > > Do you mean to merge this patch to [PATCH 3/3]? OK, that's good! No, I just mean that I don't see why you need this patch at all. If you pass the list of bus resources to pci_create_bus(), there's no need to fix anything up later. Or am I missing something? Bjorn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
2011/8/25 Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>: > No, I just mean that I don't see why you need this patch at all. If > you pass the list of bus resources to pci_create_bus(), there's no > need to fix anything up later. Or am I missing something? Well, doing the root resource fixups in here is a *paranoid* way. It's to deal with the 'unlikely' circumstance where controller_resources() returns the NULL pointer in pcibios_scanbus() due to memory allocation failure. Most of the time (always) it's nothing more than repeating the resource list setup. But maybe we can do something like this: if (unlikely(!dev && list_empty(&bus->resources)) pcibios_setup_root_resources(bus, hose); What do you think? Deng-Cheng -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Deng-Cheng Zhu <dengcheng.zhu@gmail.com> wrote: > 2011/8/25 Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>: >> No, I just mean that I don't see why you need this patch at all. If >> you pass the list of bus resources to pci_create_bus(), there's no >> need to fix anything up later. Or am I missing something? > > Well, doing the root resource fixups in here is a *paranoid* way. It's to > deal with the 'unlikely' circumstance where controller_resources() returns > the NULL pointer in pcibios_scanbus() due to memory allocation failure. > Most of the time (always) it's nothing more than repeating the resource > list setup. But maybe we can do something like this: > > if (unlikely(!dev && list_empty(&bus->resources)) > pcibios_setup_root_resources(bus, hose); > > > What do you think? I don't think it's worth it. Just check for failure of controller_resources(), and if it fails, skip the pci_create_bus() call. You've already printed a message (you might add the PCI domain/bus number). Bjorn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/arch/mips/pci/pci.c b/arch/mips/pci/pci.c index 33bba7b..7473214 100644 --- a/arch/mips/pci/pci.c +++ b/arch/mips/pci/pci.c @@ -261,6 +261,14 @@ static void pcibios_fixup_device_resources(struct pci_dev *dev, } } +static void __devinit +pcibios_setup_root_resources(struct pci_bus *bus, struct pci_controller *ctrl) +{ + pci_bus_remove_resources(bus); + pci_bus_add_resource(bus, ctrl->io_resource, 0); + pci_bus_add_resource(bus, ctrl->mem_resource, 0); +} + void __devinit pcibios_fixup_bus(struct pci_bus *bus) { /* Propagate hose info into the subordinate devices. */ @@ -270,8 +278,7 @@ void __devinit pcibios_fixup_bus(struct pci_bus *bus) struct pci_dev *dev = bus->self; if (!dev) { - bus->resource[0] = hose->io_resource; - bus->resource[1] = hose->mem_resource; + pcibios_setup_root_resources(bus, hose); } else if (pci_probe_only && (dev->class >> 8) == PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_PCI) { pci_read_bridge_bases(bus);
Use this new style (instead of filling in the pci_bus->resource[] array directly) to hide some ugly implementation details. Signed-off-by: Deng-Cheng Zhu <dengcheng.zhu@gmail.com> --- arch/mips/pci/pci.c | 11 +++++++++-- 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)