> -----Original Message----- > From: Bjorn Helgaas [mailto:helg...@kernel.org] > Sent: 21 November 2016 22:32 > To: Gabriele Paoloni > Cc: liudongdong (C); a...@arndb.de; raf...@kernel.org; > lorenzo.pieral...@arm.com; t...@semihalf.com; Wangzhou (B); > pratyush.an...@gmail.com; linux-...@vger.kernel.org; linux- > a...@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; j...@redhat.com; > Chenxin (Charles); hanjun....@linaro.org; Linuxarm > Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 2/2] PCI/ACPI: hisi: Add ACPI support for > HiSilicon SoCs Host Controllers > > On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 09:09:28AM +0000, Gabriele Paoloni wrote: > > > > > +config PCI_HISI_ACPI > > > > + depends on ACPI && ARM64 > > > > + bool "HiSilicon Hip05 and Hip06 and Hip07 SoCs ACPI PCIe > > > controllers" > > > > + select PNP > > > > + help > > > > + Say Y here if you want ACPI PCIe controller support on > > > HiSilicon > > > > + Hip05 and Hip06 and Hip07 SoCs > > > > > > I'm not sure about this Kconfig setup. Do we really want to force > > > people to enable a special config option to get this support? > > > > > > I'm comparing it in my mind with other PCI quirks. They're all > > > enabled as a group by CONFIG_PCI_QUIRKS. Ultimately we want an > ACPI > > > kernel to work without requiring any platform-specific config > options. > > > > > > I'm wondering if we should consolidate all the ECAM quirk code in a > > > single place (maybe pci/ecam-quirks.c, pci/ecam.c, or pci/pci- > acpi.c), > > > under a config option like CONFIG_PCI_ECAM_QUIRKS or maybe even > plain > > > CONFIG_PCI_QUIRKS (of course, it could still be qualified by > > > CONFIG_ACPI and CONFIG_ARM64). > > > > What about having a single config options but keeping separate files > > for each vendors (at least as first step)? > > That sounds fine. The main thing is that we're trying to build a > generic kernel that can run on any ACPI arm64 platform, so we really > shouldn't have to turn on platform-specific config options.
Ok great we'll do so then Thanks Gab > > > Maybe if we see that we can consolidate all the vendors in one file > > we can do it as a second step...
