On Thu, 3 Dec 2015 15:53:17 +0100 Greg Kurz <gk...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Dec 2015 22:48:38 +0100 > Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On 30/11/15 11:45, Greg Kurz wrote: > > > Since commit 1d2d974244c6 "spapr_pci: enumerate and add PCI device tree", > > > QEMU > > > populates the PCI device tree in the opposite order compared to SLOF. > > > > > > Before 1d2d974244c6: > > > > > > Populating /pci@800000020000000 > > > 00 0000 (D) : 1af4 1000 virtio [ net ] > > > 00 0800 (D) : 1af4 1001 virtio [ block ] > > > 00 1000 (D) : 1af4 1009 virtio [ network ] > > > Populating /pci@800000020000000/unknown-legacy-device@2 > > > > > > > > > 7e5294b8 : /pci@800000020000000 > > > 7e52b998 : |-- ethernet@0 > > > 7e52c0c8 : |-- scsi@1 > > > 7e52c7e8 : +-- unknown-legacy-device@2 ok > > > > > > Since 1d2d974244c6: > > > > > > Populating /pci@800000020000000 > > > 00 1000 (D) : 1af4 1009 virtio [ network ] > > > Populating /pci@800000020000000/unknown-legacy-device@2 > > > 00 0800 (D) : 1af4 1001 virtio [ block ] > > > 00 0000 (D) : 1af4 1000 virtio [ net ] > > > > > > > > > 7e5e8118 : /pci@800000020000000 > > > 7e5ea6a0 : |-- unknown-legacy-device@2 > > > 7e5eadb8 : |-- scsi@1 > > > 7e5eb4d8 : +-- ethernet@0 ok > > > > > > This behaviour change is not actually a bug since no assumptions should be > > > made on DT ordering. But it has no real justification either, other than > > > being the consequence of the way fdt_add_subnode() inserts new elements > > > to the front of the FDT rather than adding them to the tail. > > > > > > This patch reverts to the historical SLOF ordering by walking PCI devices > > > in > > > reverse order. > > > > I've applied your patch here locally, and indeed, the device tree looks > > nicer to me, too, when the nodes are listed in ascending order. > > > > Tested-by: Thomas Huth <th...@redhat.com> > > > > > Ping ? > Thanks for testing ! > > Cheers. > > -- > Greg > >
