[PATCH 1/2][v2] pci: fsl: derive the common PCI driver to drivers/pci/host

Bjorn Helgaas bhelgaas at google.com
Wed Oct 9 10:09:56 EST 2013


On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Scott Wood <scottwood at freescale.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-10-08 at 13:13 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> [+cc Ben, Paul, linuxppc-dev]
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 04:52:54PM +0800, Minghuan Lian wrote:
>> > The Freescale's Layerscape series processors will use ARM cores.
>> > The LS1's PCIe controllers is the same as T4240's. So it's better
>> > the PCIe controller driver can support PowerPC and ARM
>> > simultaneously. This patch is for this purpose. It derives
>> > the common functions from arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pci.c to
>> > drivers/pci/host/pci-fsl-common.c and leaves the architecture
>> > specific functions which should be implemented in arch related files.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Minghuan Lian <Minghuan.Lian at freescale.com>
>>
>> I cc'd the powerpc maintainers so we can work out which tree this
>> should go through.
>>
>> > ---
>> > change log:
>> > v1-v2:
>> > 1. rename pci.h to pci-common.h
>> > 2. rename pci-fsl.c to pci-fsl-common.c
>> >
>> > Based on upstream master.
>> > Based on the discussion of RFC version here
>> > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/274487/
>> >
>> >  arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pci.c                      | 521 +-----------------
>> >  arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pci.h                      |  89 ----
>> >  .../fsl_pci.c => drivers/pci/host/pci-fsl-common.c | 591 +--------------------
>> >  .../fsl_pci.h => include/linux/fsl/pci-common.h    |  45 +-
>>
>> Is there any way to avoid putting this file in include/linux?  I know
>> you want to share it beyond PowerPC, and I know there are similar
>> examples there already, but this is all arch-specific or
>> chipset-specific stuff that seems like it should be in some
>> not-so-public place.  It doesn't seem scalable to add an include/linux
>> subdirectory for every chipset that might be shared across
>> architectures.
>
> What specifically is the problem with it, as long as it's properly
> namespaced?

Well, as I said above, it doesn't seem scalable, and it doesn't seem
to be the common existing practice.  Possibly this is just because
sharing chipsets across arches isn't very common yet.

I hadn't noticed that include/linux/fsl exists already; I thought you
were adding it.  Given that it *does* exist already, I guess I'm OK
with putting more stuff in it.

So I'll apply these given an ack from the powerpc folks.

Bjorn


More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list