Re: [PATCH v10 4/6] PCI: hisi: Add PCIe host support for HiSilicon SoC Hip05

On Wednesday 14 October 2015 08:34:43 Gabriele Paoloni wrote:

quoted

-----Original Message-----
From: Arnd Bergmann [mailto:arnd@arndb.de]
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2015 12:19 PM
To: Gabriele Paoloni
Cc: Wangzhou (B); Bjorn Helgaas; Bjorn Helgaas; jingoohan1@gmail.com;
pratyush.anand@gmail.com; linux@arm.linux.org.uk;
thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com; lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com;
james.morse@arm.com; Liviu.Dudau@arm.com; jason@lakedaemon.net;
robh@kernel.org; gabriel.fernandez@linaro.org;
Minghuan.Lian@freescale.com; linux-pci@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-
kernel@lists.infradead.org; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linux-
kernel@vger.kernel.org; zhangjukuo; qiuzhenfa; liudongdong (C);
qiujiang; xuwei (O); Liguozhu (Kenneth); Wangkefeng (Kevin); Rob
Herring
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 4/6] PCI: hisi: Add PCIe host support for
HiSilicon SoC Hip05

On Tuesday 13 October 2015 06:58:42 Gabriele Paoloni wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

+
+static int __init hisi_pcie_init(void)
+{
+      return platform_driver_probe(&hisi_pcie_driver,

hisi_pcie_probe);

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

+}
+subsys_initcall(hisi_pcie_init);

Can you use module_platform_driver() or

module_platform_driver_probe()

quoted

quoted

quoted

here instead of the subsys_initcall()?  No, I don't really know

what

quoted

quoted

quoted

the difference between module_platform_driver() and
module_platform_driver_probe() is, sorry 

module_platform_driver_probe() will only call the probe function once
(and fail in case of -EPROBE_DEFER), while module_platform_driver()
installs the platform driver in a way that the device can be bound
and unbound at any point.

quoted

quoted

In fact, I used module_platform_driver_probe in previous version,

but

quoted

quoted

A PCIe VGA card of HiSilicon will use Hip05 PCIe host, so we

modified

quoted

quoted

module_platform_driver_probe to subsys_initcall which will be

called

quoted

quoted

before module_platform_driver_probe.

We will upstream the driver of above PCIe VGA card soon.

I don't see a reason why a VGA driver would need the PCI host to be
probed this early, unless it is the only usable console in the system.

quoted

Hi Bjorn, firstly many thanks for looking at this.

About this last bit the reason why we use subsys_initcall() is that
our host bridge is embedded in the SoC and as such is not hot-

pluggable

quoted

for instance see:
http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/Documentation/driver-

model/platform.txt#L59

We should still be able to build the driver as a loadable module,
even if you don't do that on your own kernels.

Hi Arnd, I don't see the point of having loadable KOs for platform
devices that are integrated into SoCs (like PCIe Host Controllers...)

Mainly we want as many drivers as possible to be loadable modules,
and there is no reason why PCI needs to be different from other
subsystems here.

quoted

This doesn't mean that it has to be module_platform_driver,
subsys_initcall
will also work in a loadable module, it just won't be as early. However,
we should try to come up with a consistent approach for all PCI host
drivers,
I don't see any reason for hisi to be different from the others here.

To me it sounds more appropriate to adopt subsys_initcall() for all the
PCI Host Bridge controllers rather than having them as loadable modules...

What is your view?

subsys_initcall() sounds odd because it's a driver rather than a subsystem,
but I realize that most of the other levels don't fit any better.

As I said, it's not really a choice we have to make in the source code,
we can use subsys_initcall together with module_exit(), or we can
create a helper macro that is similar to module_platform_driver()
specifically for PCI that uses a particular initcall level.

	Arnd