On Jul 27, 2012, at 3:24 PM, Scott Wood wrote: > On 07/27/2012 05:10 AM, Jia Hongtao-B38951 wrote: >> Hi kumar, >> >> I know "duplicate code from pci_process_bridge_OF_ranges()" is >> hard to accept but "refactor the code to have a shared function" >> is knotty. Actually this is the reason I didn't do the refactor. > > Maybe we should keep doing the init early? We could still have a > platform device for the PM stuff, but some init would be done before probe. > > Another possibility is to try to handle swiotlb init later -- possibly > by reserving memory for it if the platform indicates it's a possibility > that it will be needed, then freeing the memory if it's not needed. > > -Scott
I think the first option seems reasonable. Can we leave fsl_pci_init() as we now have it and just have the platform driver deal with PM restore via calling setup_pci_atmu() [probably need to update setup_pci_atmu to handle restore case, but seems like minor changes] - k _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
