Re: [RFC] asm-generic/pci_iomap.h: make custom PCI BAR requirements explicit
From: Martin Schwidefsky
Date: Tue Oct 06 2015 - 07:15:21 EST
On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 19:09:14 +0200
"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 09:02:04PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Saturday 03 October 2015 01:53:46 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hmm, my gut feeling tells me that your approach won't solve the problem
> > > > in general. s390 PCI is just weird in many ways and it will occasionally
> > > > suffer from problems like this (as do other aspects of the s390 architecture
> > > > that are unlike the rest of the world).
> > > >
> > > > Maybe Martin and Heiko can comment on this, they may have a preference
> > > > from the s390 point of view.
> > >
> > > Hrm, so S390 is quirky is really odd ways that no other architecture is or
> > > is at least for now not expected to be ?
> >
> > Absolutely correct. It is the only architecture I'm aware of that tries to
> > support PCI that does not use pointer dereferences for MMIO.
>
> So its not worth it to have a formal semantic via Kconfig for this and are
> happy with the status quo of having to find out through a bot compile test
> any changes in this domain fails?
For my part I still do not see the value in ARCH_PCI_NON_DISJUNCTIVE.
The existing GENERIC_PCI_IOMAP already allows an architecture to select
the generic implementation (or not to select it). To add another Kconfig
symbol and make GENERIC_PCI_IOMAP depend on it doesn't help.
--
blue skies,
Martin.
"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.
--
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/