On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 5:22 PM Dan Williams [off-list ref] wrote:

Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:

quoted

From: Bartosz Golaszewski <redacted>

In order to introduce PCI power-sequencing, we need to create platform
devices for child nodes of the port node. They will get matched against
the pwrseq drivers (if one exists) and then the actual PCI device will
reuse the node once it's detected on the bus.

Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <redacted>

[..]

quoted

diff --git a/drivers/pci/remove.c b/drivers/pci/remove.c
index d749ea8250d6..77be0630b7b3 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/remove.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/remove.c

@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
 #include <linux/pci.h>
 #include <linux/module.h>
+#include <linux/of_platform.h>
 #include "pci.h"

 static void pci_free_resources(struct pci_dev *dev)

@@ -18,11 +19,11 @@ static void pci_stop_dev(struct pci_dev *dev)
      pci_pme_active(dev, false);

      if (pci_dev_is_added(dev)) {
-
              device_release_driver(&dev->dev);
              pci_proc_detach_device(dev);
              pci_remove_sysfs_dev_files(dev);
              of_pci_remove_node(dev);
+             of_platform_depopulate(&dev->dev);

              pci_dev_assign_added(dev, false);

Why is pci_stop_dev() not in strict reverse order of
pci_bus_add_device()? I see that pci_dev_assign_added() was already not
in reverse "add" order before your change, but I otherwise would have
expected of_platform_depopulate() before of_pci_remove_node() (assumed
paired with of_pci_make_dev_node()).

The naming here is confusing but the two have nothing in common. One
is used by CONFIG_PCI_DYNAMIC_OF_NODES to *create* new DT nodes for
detected PCI devices. The one I'm adding, creates power sequencing
*devices* (no nodes) for *existing* DT nodes.

So the order is not really relevant here but I can change in v2.

Bartosz

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel