RE: [PATCH v2 1/2] PCI: altera: refactor driver for supporting new platform

[D M, Sharath Kumar]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, September 9, 2023 1:23 AM
> To: D M, Sharath Kumar <sharath.kumar.d.m@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: lpieralisi@xxxxxxxxxx; kw@xxxxxxxxx; robh@xxxxxxxxxx;
> bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dinguyen@xxxxxxxxxx;
> linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] PCI: altera: refactor driver for supporting new
> platform
> 
> On Fri, Sep 08, 2023 at 01:40:13PM +0000, D M, Sharath Kumar wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> On Fri, Sep 08, 2023 at
> > > 09:09:34AM +0000, D M, Sharath Kumar wrote:
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> ...
> > >
> > > > > > +	int (*ep_read_cfg)(struct altera_pcie *pcie, u8 busno,
> > > > > > +			unsigned int devfn, int where, int size, u32
> *value);
> > > > > > +	int (*ep_write_cfg)(struct altera_pcie *pcie, u8 busno,
> > > > > > +			unsigned int devfn, int where, int size, u32
> value);
> > > > >
> > > > > "ep_read_cfg" isn't the ideal name because it suggests
> > > > > "endpoint", but it may be either an endpoint or a switch
> > > > > upstream port.  The rockchip driver uses "other", which isn't
> > > > > super descriptive either but
> > > might be better.
> > > > >
> > > > Ok will change to "nonrp_read_cfg" ?
> > >
> > > I think the important point is not whether it's a Root Port or not,
> > > but whether it's on the root *bus* or not.  In other words, I think
> > > the driver has to determine whether to generate a Type 0 (targeting
> > > something on the root
> > > bus) or a Type 1 (targeting something below a
> > > bridge) config transaction (see PCI-to-PCI Bridge spec r1.2, sec 3.1.2.1).
> > >
> > > There can be non-Root Ports on the root bus, so "nonrp" doesn't seem
> > > quite right.  "Other" would be OK, since that's already used by other
> drivers.
> > > Maybe "type0" and "type1" would be better and would fit well with
> > > the root_bus_nr check you use to distinguish them?
> > >
> > Situation is
> > Root port configuration space  - memory mapped Non root port
> > configuration space - indirect access/proprietary access
> >     Type 0 for devices directly connected to root port
> >     Type 1 for others
> 
> "mm", "ind"?
Memory mapped -  configuration registers available at pre defined address