Re: [PATCH V5 01/15] ACPI: MCFG: Move mmcfg_list management to drivers/acpi

From: Jayachandran C
Date: Tue Apr 05 2016 - 14:51:19 EST


Hi Bjorn,

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 10:11 PM, Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Tomasz,
>
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 04:11:55PM +0200, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
> > On 09.03.2016 10:13, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
> > >Hi Bjorn,
> > >
> > >Thanks for your pointers! See my comments inline. Aslo, can you please
> > >have a look at my previous patch set v4 and check how many of your
> > >comments are already addressed there. We may want to back to it then.
> > >
> > >https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/2/4/646
> > >Especially patches [0-6] which handle MMCONFIG refactoring.
> > >
> > >
> > >On 05.03.2016 05:14, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> [...]
> > >
> > >As you pointed out raw_pci_{read|write} make things complicated, so IMO
> > >we should either say they are absolutely necessary (and then think how
> > >to simplify it) or just use simple bus-specific accessor (patch 02/15)
> > >e.g. for ARM64.
> > >
> > >Any comments appreciated.
>
> > Kindly reminder. I would like to move on with this patch set. Can
> > you please comments on it so that we could decide which way to go.
>
> Can you repost your current proposal with a version number higher than
> any previous ones? It's OK if the content is the same as v4; I just
> think it's confusing if we resurrect v4 and have to follow discussion
> from v3 to v4 to v5 and back to v4. The archives would be a bit of a
> muddle.

I had posted a patchset based on your suggestions in this thread
https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/3/17/621

Would appreciate any comments on that. Like I said in the earlier
mail, if this is a reasonable approach, I can combine this with
Tomasz patchset to provide the full patchset for ACPI support.

Thanks,
JC.