On Apr 17, 2009, at 12:05 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Fri, 2009-04-17 at 09:08 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:
The problem is that the "normal" PCI config access routines need a
pci_bus. However we don't have one yet and we need to do PCI config
cycles to the PHB before we call the remainder of the setup code to
get one.
We could all call our own ops directly and provide a fake bus but
this
is pretty much what the early routines do for us in a common way.
Ah right, slipped out of my mind. Oh well, easy to make the code
common, move it to pci-common.c
Right, I can do that... In doing so I was wondering two things w/
regards to fake_pci_bus:
1. can we drop the hose == 0 check, it looks like there are 3 users of
the early pci ops code (fsl, 4xx, pmac). The FSL one I can say passes
a valid hose in and it looks like 4xx does as well. The pmac code is
always a bit more trick so I figured you might know
2. Do we believe those hose->ops is always valid -- again FSL & 4xx it
is, pmac??
static struct pci_bus *
fake_pci_bus(struct pci_controller *hose, int busnr)
{
static struct pci_bus bus;
if (hose == 0) {
hose = pci_bus_to_hose(busnr);
if (hose == 0)
printk(KERN_ERR "Can't find hose for PCI bus
%d!\n", busnr);
}
bus.number = busnr;
bus.sysdata = hose;
bus.ops = hose? hose->ops: &null_pci_ops;
return &bus;
}
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
