Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1327798
| From | Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] add new platform driver for PCI RC |
| Date | 2016-02-05 15:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qYPIe-1t6-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qYuu5-3V9-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <qYBOV-xk-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <qYM7E-7sR-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Friday 05 February 2016 10:44:29 Joao Pinto wrote: > Hi, > > On 2/4/2016 11:43 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > >> What do you think? > > > > I don't think the "dw" part is relevant (none of the other > > DesignWare-based drivers includes it in the driver or file name). > > > > How do people typically refer to this board? > > > > I really like "synopsys" because it fits the pattern of being > > recognizable and pronounceable like "altera", "designware", "qcom", > > "keystone", "layerscape", "tegra", etc. But I can't tell whether it's > > too generic. > > > > "ipk" or "haps" would be fine with me. I think it's OK if it doesn't > > cover 100% of the possible systems. > > I think we should follow the iproc example: pcie-iproc-platform.c > In this case we would have pcie-designware-platform.c > I think this would be the best name because the driver is a non soc specific > designware platform driver. > > Arnd and Bjorn agree on this name? Sorry, I did not realize that your submission was for the generic dw-pcie implementation rather than a particular product integrating it. I think in this case, we should do this completely differently: How about putting all the new code into drivers/pci/host/pcie-designware.c as functions that can be used by the other drivers in absence of a chip specific handler? Instead of providing a new instance of struct pcie_host_ops, maybe add it as a default implementation in dw_pcie_link_up() and dw_pcie_host_init() for drivers that don't provide their own. "hisi_pcie_host_ops" currently provides no host_init() callback function, so you will have to change the hisi frontend to a provide nop-function. For all other drivers, check if they can be changed to use your generic implementation and remove their private callbacks if possible. I think the MSI implementation should be split out into a separate file though, as not everyone uses this. Arnd
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH v8 2/2] add new platform driver for PCI RC Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@synopsys.com> - 2016-02-04 17:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] add new platform driver for PCI RC Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org> - 2016-02-04 19:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] add new platform driver for PCI RC Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@synopsys.com> - 2016-02-04 19:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] add new platform driver for PCI RC Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org> - 2016-02-05 00:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] add new platform driver for PCI RC Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@synopsys.com> - 2016-02-05 11:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] add new platform driver for PCI RC Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2016-02-05 15:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] add new platform driver for PCI RC Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@synopsys.com> - 2016-02-05 16:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] add new platform driver for PCI RC Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2016-02-05 16:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] add new platform driver for PCI RC Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@synopsys.com> - 2016-02-05 17:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] add new platform driver for PCI RC Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org> - 2016-02-06 00:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] add new platform driver for PCI RC Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2016-02-08 13:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] add new platform driver for PCI RC Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@synopsys.com> - 2016-02-08 14:00 +0100
csiph-web