Re: [PATCH v8 6/9] pci: Introduce a domain number for pci_host_bridge.
From: Bjorn Helgaas
Date: Tue Jul 08 2014 - 14:42:20 EST
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 4:46 AM, Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 01:59:54AM +0100, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> I wonder if it would help to make a weak pci_domain_nr() function that
>> returns "bridge->domain_nr". Then each arch could individually drop its
>> pci_domain_nr() definition as it was converted, e.g., something like this:
>> - Convert every arch pci_domain_nr() from a #define to a non-inline
>> - Add bridge.domain_nr, initialized from pci_domain_nr()
>> - Add a weak generic pci_domain_nr() that returns bridge.domain_nr
>> - Add a way to create a host bridge in a specified domain, so we can
>> initialize bridge.domain_nr without using pci_domain_nr()
>> - Convert each arch to use the new creation mechanism and drop its
>> pci_domain_nr() implementation
> I will try to propose a patch implementing this.
I think this is more of an extra credit, cleanup sort of thing. I
don't think it advances your primary goal of (I think) getting arm64
PCI support in. So my advice is to not worry about unifying domain
handling until later.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/