From: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Wei Xu <xuwei5@hisilicon.com>, Linuxarm <linuxarm@huawei.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] bus: hisi_lpc: Expand build test coverage
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2019 10:26:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8c969173-be79-b8c4-c871-982d22d4fc18@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK8P3a2LZnDfT_yNaDo4CgheC-1dZvK3DMrC8RY6qt4F6rEGvg@mail.gmail.com>
On 02/10/2019 19:22, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 6:25 PM John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com> wrote:
>> On 02/10/2019 16:43, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 6:07 PM John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Currently the driver will only ever be built for ARM64 because it selects
>>>> CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO, which itself depends on ARM64.
>>>>
>>>> Expand build test coverage for the driver to other architectures by only
>>>> selecting CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO for ARM64, when we really want it.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
>>>
>>
>> Hi Arnd,
>>
>>> Good idea, but doesn't this cause a link failure against
>>> logic_pio_register_range() when INDIRECT_PIO is disabled?
>>
>> No, it shouldn't do. Function
>> lib/logic_pio.c::logic_pio_register_range() is built always, outside any
>> INDIRECT_PIO checking.
>
> Ok, I see.
>
>> A some stage, for completeness we should probably change
>> logic_pio_register_range() and friends to be under PCI_IOBASE. But then
>> we would need stubs for !PCI_IOBASE, due to this above change and also
>> references from the device tree code. I'd have to consider this a bit
>> more. Let me know what you think.
>
> It's probably not to do this with the usual 'static inline' stubs in the
> header files. There is no rush here, but it would be nice to not build
> this code when it is not needed.
Agreed, I'll add it to my todo list.
So we want to build logic_pio.c for archs which define PCI_IOBASE, but
there is no specific config option for that.
>
> I wonder if this one-line change would take care of the !CONFIG_OF
> case already (it probably doesn't):
>
> --- a/lib/Makefile
> +++ b/lib/Makefile
> @@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_HAS_IOMEM) += iomap_copy.o devres.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_CHECK_SIGNATURE) += check_signature.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKING_API_SELFTESTS) += locking-selftest.o
>
> -obj-y += logic_pio.o
> +lib-y += logic_pio.o
So that means that this obj will not be included in the vmlinux file for
!CONFIG_OF (for archs with !PCI_IOBASE or !PCI).
It is an improvement, but I still would like to make the complete change
and not to build at all for archs which don't define PCI_IOBASE.
>
> obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_HWEIGHT) += hweight.o
>
> On a related note: At some point we may want to add an indirect
> method for readl()/writel(), to deal with some of the weirder 32-bit
> ARM platforms. We'll have to see how well this can fit into the
> infrastructure we already have for indirect PIO.
It should be possible. We would just need to manage 2 separate logical
spaces instead of one: a. mmio b. pio
I'm guessing that all the code for logical <-> hw bus address
translations would be the same.
Thanks,
John
>
> Arnd
>
> .
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-03 9:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-01 16:04 [PATCH 0/3] hisi_lpc: Improve " John Garry
2019-10-01 16:04 ` [PATCH 1/3] lib: logic_pio: Enforce LOGIC_PIO_INDIRECT region ops are set at registration John Garry
2019-10-01 16:04 ` [PATCH 2/3] logic_pio: Define PIO_INDIRECT_SIZE for !CONFIG_INDIRECT_PIO John Garry
2019-10-01 16:04 ` [PATCH 3/3] bus: hisi_lpc: Expand build test coverage John Garry
2019-10-02 15:43 ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-10-02 16:24 ` John Garry
2019-10-02 18:22 ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-10-03 9:26 ` John Garry [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=8c969173-be79-b8c4-c871-982d22d4fc18@huawei.com \
--to=john.garry@huawei.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
--cc=olof@lixom.net \
--cc=xuwei5@hisilicon.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®