Re: Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Add Keystone PCIe controller driver

Mohit,

On 06/23/2014 12:49 PM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Add Keystone PCIe controller driver
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 10:43:46 +0530
From: Pratyush Anand<redacted>
To: Murali Karicheri<redacted>

On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 05:17:07AM +0800, Murali Karicheri wrote:

quoted

Sorry, my previous response was in html and not sure it has made to the
list. I did
get an error as well. So resending my response.

On 6/18/2014 6:14 AM, Mohit KUMAR DCG wrote:

quoted

Hello Murali,

[...]

quoted

*pos = pos0;

@@ -349,7 +353,10 @@ static int dw_msi_setup_irq(struct msi_chip *chip,

struct pci_dev *pdev,

*/

desc->msi_attrib.multiple = msgvec;

-msg.address_lo = virt_to_phys((void *)pp->msi_data);

+if (pp->ops->get_msi_data)

+msg.address_lo = pp->ops->get_msi_data(pp);

+else

+msg.address_lo = virt_to_phys((void *)pp->msi_data);

msg.address_hi = 0x0;

msg.data = pos;


What about this code? This requires get_msi_data() as well

pp->msi_data is set in dw_pcie_msi_init, which is a global function
called from vendor specific code. You can have your own
keystone_pcie_msi_init and then you do not need above changes.

My Apologies for the email format as I lost the original email and had
to respond using a forwarded email.

If you look at my original patch, keystone driver was not calling
dw_pcie_msi_init(). However the issue is msi_chip of DW core is
re-used as most of the code is platform independent. However
code that sends write_msi_msg() can be re-used on keystone by
adding this get_msi_data() API as the only difference IMO is the
address EP writes to raise an MSI IRQ event. I don't see any
reason why the entire code needs to be duplicated on Keystone.
BTW, currently I have not tested the MSI IRQ and tested my driver
only with Legacy IRQ. I plan to test this before sending my
v3 of the patch.

Murali

quoted

quoted

-- 3rd to use pp->ops->msi_set/clear if defined.

Why not API enhancement and refactor the code in a single patch?

Yes, can be. You can send changes in 2 or 3 patches as you wish, but I
believe that should be able to solve problem in best way.

Regards
Pratyush

quoted

Murali

quoted

Pls let us know for any issue or have different opinion.

Regards
Mohit

quoted

--
1.7.9.5