Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
On 09/26/2018 07:42 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Marek, > > On 20 September 2018 at 17:56, Marek Vasut wrote: >> On 09/20/2018 03:47 AM, Bin Meng wrote: >> [...] >> > I suspect the best answer is to move the emulator so it is a direct > child of the bus. You would need to update sandbox_pci_get_emul() to > call device_find_first_child() on 'bus' instead of 'dev'. Sounds to me _way_ out of scope for this patchset. >>> >>> Dynamic binding is already supported on Sandbox. I guess Simon may >>> have missed the part. >> >> Well, where is an example of that ? Because I am not seeing one. >> > > I already pointed out in the previous email. In > arch/sandbox/dts/test.dts, the 2nd PCI controller has two swap_case > devices and the 3rd controller has one. By "second" you mean pci1: or pci2: ? Because pci1: is second , after pci0 . It'd really help if you were clearer in what you refer to. >>> >>> It's pci1. You can see there is no subnode under pci1 there yet if you >>> type 'pci 1' from the U-Boot shell you see two PCI devices. >> >> I'd really appreciate it if you could be more precise when referring to >> things. >> > In swap_case.c, U_BOOT_PCI_DEVICE() is there which is also a clear > sign that the driver supports dynamic binding. Of course, the driver > supports "compatible" too as you noticed. Are you talking about sandbox,dev-info DT property here ? >>> >>> This is the property Sandbox uses to make the dynamic binding work. >>> You can bypass this. >> >> Why would I want to bypass this ? >> >>> The key here is that swap_case driver supports >>> both "compatible" and dynamic binding, so you can write test cases to >>> cover this newly added ofnode scenario. >> >> That's great, and after spending even more time on this (probably days >> by now), I just keep finding more and more limitations of the virtual >> PCI subsystem which makes writing this testcase really hard. And none of >> that really helps fixing the real problem on my real hardware, which >> really stays broken. > > You could fix that with a 5-minute patch to add a compatible string :-) No, that's a hack. > The problem is that you want to do it a certain way. Yes the test > system has limitations but it is better than what we had before (no > tests). We should expand its capability as we add new functionality. > > Regards, > Simon > -- Best regards, Marek Vasut ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
Hi Marek, On 20 September 2018 at 17:56, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 09/20/2018 03:47 AM, Bin Meng wrote: > [...] > I suspect the best answer is to move the emulator so it is a direct child of the bus. You would need to update sandbox_pci_get_emul() to call device_find_first_child() on 'bus' instead of 'dev'. >>> >>> Sounds to me _way_ out of scope for this patchset. >> >> Dynamic binding is already supported on Sandbox. I guess Simon may >> have missed the part. > > Well, where is an example of that ? Because I am not seeing one. > I already pointed out in the previous email. In arch/sandbox/dts/test.dts, the 2nd PCI controller has two swap_case devices and the 3rd controller has one. >>> >>> By "second" you mean pci1: or pci2: ? Because pci1: is second , after >>> pci0 . It'd really help if you were clearer in what you refer to. >>> >> >> It's pci1. You can see there is no subnode under pci1 there yet if you >> type 'pci 1' from the U-Boot shell you see two PCI devices. > > I'd really appreciate it if you could be more precise when referring to > things. > In swap_case.c, U_BOOT_PCI_DEVICE() is there which is also a clear sign that the driver supports dynamic binding. Of course, the driver supports "compatible" too as you noticed. >>> >>> Are you talking about sandbox,dev-info DT property here ? >> >> This is the property Sandbox uses to make the dynamic binding work. >> You can bypass this. > > Why would I want to bypass this ? > >> The key here is that swap_case driver supports >> both "compatible" and dynamic binding, so you can write test cases to >> cover this newly added ofnode scenario. > > That's great, and after spending even more time on this (probably days > by now), I just keep finding more and more limitations of the virtual > PCI subsystem which makes writing this testcase really hard. And none of > that really helps fixing the real problem on my real hardware, which > really stays broken. You could fix that with a 5-minute patch to add a compatible string :-) The problem is that you want to do it a certain way. Yes the test system has limitations but it is better than what we had before (no tests). We should expand its capability as we add new functionality. Regards, Simon ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
On 09/20/2018 03:47 AM, Bin Meng wrote: [...] >>> I suspect the best answer is to move the emulator so it is a direct >>> child of the bus. You would need to update sandbox_pci_get_emul() to >>> call device_find_first_child() on 'bus' instead of 'dev'. >> >> Sounds to me _way_ out of scope for this patchset. > > Dynamic binding is already supported on Sandbox. I guess Simon may > have missed the part. Well, where is an example of that ? Because I am not seeing one. >>> >>> I already pointed out in the previous email. In >>> arch/sandbox/dts/test.dts, the 2nd PCI controller has two swap_case >>> devices and the 3rd controller has one. >> >> By "second" you mean pci1: or pci2: ? Because pci1: is second , after >> pci0 . It'd really help if you were clearer in what you refer to. >> > > It's pci1. You can see there is no subnode under pci1 there yet if you > type 'pci 1' from the U-Boot shell you see two PCI devices. I'd really appreciate it if you could be more precise when referring to things. >>> In swap_case.c, U_BOOT_PCI_DEVICE() is there which is also a clear >>> sign that the driver supports dynamic binding. Of course, the driver >>> supports "compatible" too as you noticed. >> >> Are you talking about sandbox,dev-info DT property here ? > > This is the property Sandbox uses to make the dynamic binding work. > You can bypass this. Why would I want to bypass this ? > The key here is that swap_case driver supports > both "compatible" and dynamic binding, so you can write test cases to > cover this newly added ofnode scenario. That's great, and after spending even more time on this (probably days by now), I just keep finding more and more limitations of the virtual PCI subsystem which makes writing this testcase really hard. And none of that really helps fixing the real problem on my real hardware, which really stays broken. -- Best regards, Marek Vasut ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
Hi Marek, On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 9:28 PM Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 09/19/2018 11:41 AM, Bin Meng wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 5:34 PM Marek Vasut wrote: > >> > >> On 09/19/2018 11:26 AM, Bin Meng wrote: > >>> Hi Marek, > >>> > >>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 4:21 PM Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 09/18/2018 03:52 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > > > On 18 September 2018 at 13:36, Marek Vasut > > wrote: > >> > >> On 09/14/2018 06:41 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > >>> Hi Marek, > >>> > >>> On 10 September 2018 at 01:38, Marek Vasut > >>> wrote: > > On 09/02/2018 03:07 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > Hi, > > > On 1 September 2018 at 16:45, Marek Vasut > > wrote: > >> > >> On 09/01/2018 11:50 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > >>> Hi Marek, > >>> > >>> On 30 August 2018 at 07:42, Marek Vasut > >>> wrote: > On 08/30/2018 03:32 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > > > On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:07 AM Marek Vasut > > wrote: > >> > >> On 08/29/2018 05:15 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > >>> +Simon > >>> > >>> Hi Marek, > >>> > >>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut > >>> wrote: > > On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > > The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra > > properties > > of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI > > controller > > on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and > > assigns a node > > to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract > > details > > from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY > > subsystem. > > > > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut > > Cc: Simon Glass > > Cc: Tom Rini > > Well, bump ? > > This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working > properly. > >>> > >>> I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon > >>> had a > >>> long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a > >>> 'fallback' to > >>> find a node with no compatible string. > >>> > >>> Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a > >>> test > >>> case to cover this scenario. > >> > >> The fact that it works on a particular board is not tested > >> enough? > >> Do we need a custom, special, synthetic test ? > >> > > > > I believe that's always been the requirement against the DM code > > changes. I was requested in the past when I changed something > > in the > > DM and I see other people were asked to do so. Like Alex said, > > it does > > not mean this patch was not tested enough, but to ensure future > > commits won't break this. > > So, do you have any suggestion how to implement this test ? It > seems > Alex posed the same question. It doesn't seem to be trivial in > the > context of sandbox. > >>> > >>> I suppose you need a PCI_DEVICE() declaration for sandbox, with an > >>> associated DT node and no compatible string. Then check that you > >>> can > >>> locate the device and that it read a DT property correctly. > >> > >> Is there any example of this stuff already ? > > > > See the bottom of swap_case.c. You might be able to add a new one > > of those, > > > > If you look at pci-controller2 in test.dts it has a device with a > > compatible string. You could try adding a second device with no > > compatible string. > > And how does that test anything ? > >>> > >>> You can test that your code actually attaches the DT node to the > >>> probed device. Without you code the test would fail. Wit it, it would > >>> pass. > >> > >> Well it won't, because the sandbox swap_case.c requires the compatible. > >> This all seems like a big hack to support virtual PCI devices. > >> > >> The driver binds with a compatible and then pins the read/write config > >> reg accessors to emulate their return values. Those include PCI IDs. So > >> you cannot instantiate virtual PCI device without this
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
On 09/19/2018 11:41 AM, Bin Meng wrote: > Hi Marek, > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 5:34 PM Marek Vasut wrote: >> >> On 09/19/2018 11:26 AM, Bin Meng wrote: >>> Hi Marek, >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 4:21 PM Marek Vasut wrote: On 09/18/2018 03:52 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Marek, > > On 18 September 2018 at 13:36, Marek Vasut wrote: >> >> On 09/14/2018 06:41 AM, Simon Glass wrote: >>> Hi Marek, >>> >>> On 10 September 2018 at 01:38, Marek Vasut >>> wrote: On 09/02/2018 03:07 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Marek, Hi, > On 1 September 2018 at 16:45, Marek Vasut > wrote: >> >> On 09/01/2018 11:50 PM, Simon Glass wrote: >>> Hi Marek, >>> >>> On 30 August 2018 at 07:42, Marek Vasut >>> wrote: On 08/30/2018 03:32 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > Hi Marek, > > On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:07 AM Marek Vasut > wrote: >> >> On 08/29/2018 05:15 PM, Bin Meng wrote: >>> +Simon >>> >>> Hi Marek, >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut >>> wrote: On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra > properties > of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI > controller > on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns > a node > to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract > details > from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY > subsystem. > > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut > Cc: Simon Glass > Cc: Tom Rini Well, bump ? This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working properly. >>> >>> I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon >>> had a >>> long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a >>> 'fallback' to >>> find a node with no compatible string. >>> >>> Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a >>> test >>> case to cover this scenario. >> >> The fact that it works on a particular board is not tested >> enough? >> Do we need a custom, special, synthetic test ? >> > > I believe that's always been the requirement against the DM code > changes. I was requested in the past when I changed something in > the > DM and I see other people were asked to do so. Like Alex said, it > does > not mean this patch was not tested enough, but to ensure future > commits won't break this. So, do you have any suggestion how to implement this test ? It seems Alex posed the same question. It doesn't seem to be trivial in the context of sandbox. >>> >>> I suppose you need a PCI_DEVICE() declaration for sandbox, with an >>> associated DT node and no compatible string. Then check that you can >>> locate the device and that it read a DT property correctly. >> >> Is there any example of this stuff already ? > > See the bottom of swap_case.c. You might be able to add a new one of > those, > > If you look at pci-controller2 in test.dts it has a device with a > compatible string. You could try adding a second device with no > compatible string. And how does that test anything ? >>> >>> You can test that your code actually attaches the DT node to the >>> probed device. Without you code the test would fail. Wit it, it would >>> pass. >> >> Well it won't, because the sandbox swap_case.c requires the compatible. >> This all seems like a big hack to support virtual PCI devices. >> >> The driver binds with a compatible and then pins the read/write config >> reg accessors to emulate their return values. Those include PCI IDs. So >> you cannot instantiate virtual PCI device without this compatible string >> and thus also cannot write such a test easily. >> >> Now I also understand where this whole discussion about compatible >> strings came from though. > > The compatible string is needed for the emulation driver but not for > the thing that connects to it. However as things stand you can't > attach
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
Hi Marek, On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 5:34 PM Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 09/19/2018 11:26 AM, Bin Meng wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 4:21 PM Marek Vasut wrote: > >> > >> On 09/18/2018 03:52 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > >>> Hi Marek, > >>> > >>> On 18 September 2018 at 13:36, Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 09/14/2018 06:41 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > > > On 10 September 2018 at 01:38, Marek Vasut > > wrote: > >> > >> On 09/02/2018 03:07 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > >>> Hi Marek, > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >>> On 1 September 2018 at 16:45, Marek Vasut > >>> wrote: > > On 09/01/2018 11:50 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > > > On 30 August 2018 at 07:42, Marek Vasut > > wrote: > >> On 08/30/2018 03:32 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > >>> Hi Marek, > >>> > >>> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:07 AM Marek Vasut > >>> wrote: > > On 08/29/2018 05:15 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > > +Simon > > > > Hi Marek, > > > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut > > wrote: > >> > >> On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > >>> The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra > >>> properties > >>> of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI > >>> controller > >>> on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns > >>> a node > >>> to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract > >>> details > >>> from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY > >>> subsystem. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut > >>> Cc: Simon Glass > >>> Cc: Tom Rini > >> > >> Well, bump ? > >> > >> This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working > >> properly. > > > > I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon > > had a > > long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a > > 'fallback' to > > find a node with no compatible string. > > > > Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a > > test > > case to cover this scenario. > > The fact that it works on a particular board is not tested > enough? > Do we need a custom, special, synthetic test ? > > >>> > >>> I believe that's always been the requirement against the DM code > >>> changes. I was requested in the past when I changed something in > >>> the > >>> DM and I see other people were asked to do so. Like Alex said, it > >>> does > >>> not mean this patch was not tested enough, but to ensure future > >>> commits won't break this. > >> > >> So, do you have any suggestion how to implement this test ? It > >> seems > >> Alex posed the same question. It doesn't seem to be trivial in the > >> context of sandbox. > > > > I suppose you need a PCI_DEVICE() declaration for sandbox, with an > > associated DT node and no compatible string. Then check that you can > > locate the device and that it read a DT property correctly. > > Is there any example of this stuff already ? > >>> > >>> See the bottom of swap_case.c. You might be able to add a new one of > >>> those, > >>> > >>> If you look at pci-controller2 in test.dts it has a device with a > >>> compatible string. You could try adding a second device with no > >>> compatible string. > >> > >> And how does that test anything ? > > > > You can test that your code actually attaches the DT node to the > > probed device. Without you code the test would fail. Wit it, it would > > pass. > > Well it won't, because the sandbox swap_case.c requires the compatible. > This all seems like a big hack to support virtual PCI devices. > > The driver binds with a compatible and then pins the read/write config > reg accessors to emulate their return values. Those include PCI IDs. So > you cannot instantiate virtual PCI device without this compatible string > and thus also cannot write such a test easily. > > Now I also understand where this whole discussion about compatible > strings came from though. > >>> > >>> The compatible string is needed for the emulation driver but not for > >>> the thing that connects to it. However as things stand you can't > >>> attach an emulator to a bus without nesting it under the
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
On 09/19/2018 11:26 AM, Bin Meng wrote: > Hi Marek, > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 4:21 PM Marek Vasut wrote: >> >> On 09/18/2018 03:52 PM, Simon Glass wrote: >>> Hi Marek, >>> >>> On 18 September 2018 at 13:36, Marek Vasut wrote: On 09/14/2018 06:41 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Marek, > > On 10 September 2018 at 01:38, Marek Vasut wrote: >> >> On 09/02/2018 03:07 AM, Simon Glass wrote: >>> Hi Marek, >> >> Hi, >> >>> On 1 September 2018 at 16:45, Marek Vasut wrote: On 09/01/2018 11:50 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Marek, > > On 30 August 2018 at 07:42, Marek Vasut wrote: >> On 08/30/2018 03:32 PM, Bin Meng wrote: >>> Hi Marek, >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:07 AM Marek Vasut >>> wrote: On 08/29/2018 05:15 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > +Simon > > Hi Marek, > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut > wrote: >> >> On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: >>> The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra >>> properties >>> of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI >>> controller >>> on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns a >>> node >>> to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract >>> details >>> from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY >>> subsystem. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut >>> Cc: Simon Glass >>> Cc: Tom Rini >> >> Well, bump ? >> >> This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working >> properly. > > I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon had > a > long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a > 'fallback' to > find a node with no compatible string. > > Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a test > case to cover this scenario. The fact that it works on a particular board is not tested enough? Do we need a custom, special, synthetic test ? >>> >>> I believe that's always been the requirement against the DM code >>> changes. I was requested in the past when I changed something in the >>> DM and I see other people were asked to do so. Like Alex said, it >>> does >>> not mean this patch was not tested enough, but to ensure future >>> commits won't break this. >> >> So, do you have any suggestion how to implement this test ? It seems >> Alex posed the same question. It doesn't seem to be trivial in the >> context of sandbox. > > I suppose you need a PCI_DEVICE() declaration for sandbox, with an > associated DT node and no compatible string. Then check that you can > locate the device and that it read a DT property correctly. Is there any example of this stuff already ? >>> >>> See the bottom of swap_case.c. You might be able to add a new one of >>> those, >>> >>> If you look at pci-controller2 in test.dts it has a device with a >>> compatible string. You could try adding a second device with no >>> compatible string. >> >> And how does that test anything ? > > You can test that your code actually attaches the DT node to the > probed device. Without you code the test would fail. Wit it, it would > pass. Well it won't, because the sandbox swap_case.c requires the compatible. This all seems like a big hack to support virtual PCI devices. The driver binds with a compatible and then pins the read/write config reg accessors to emulate their return values. Those include PCI IDs. So you cannot instantiate virtual PCI device without this compatible string and thus also cannot write such a test easily. Now I also understand where this whole discussion about compatible strings came from though. >>> >>> The compatible string is needed for the emulation driver but not for >>> the thing that connects to it. However as things stand you can't >>> attach an emulator to a bus without nesting it under the device which >>> it attaches to. >>> >>> I suspect the best answer is to move the emulator so it is a direct >>> child of the bus. You would need to update sandbox_pci_get_emul() to >>> call device_find_first_child() on 'bus' instead of 'dev'. >> >> Sounds to me _way_ out of scope for this patchset. > > Dynamic binding is already supported on Sandbox. I guess Simon may > have missed the
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
Hi Marek, On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 4:21 PM Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 09/18/2018 03:52 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > > > On 18 September 2018 at 13:36, Marek Vasut wrote: > >> > >> On 09/14/2018 06:41 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > >>> Hi Marek, > >>> > >>> On 10 September 2018 at 01:38, Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 09/02/2018 03:07 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > Hi, > > > On 1 September 2018 at 16:45, Marek Vasut wrote: > >> > >> On 09/01/2018 11:50 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > >>> Hi Marek, > >>> > >>> On 30 August 2018 at 07:42, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 08/30/2018 03:32 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > > > On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:07 AM Marek Vasut > > wrote: > >> > >> On 08/29/2018 05:15 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > >>> +Simon > >>> > >>> Hi Marek, > >>> > >>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut > >>> wrote: > > On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > > The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra > > properties > > of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI > > controller > > on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns a > > node > > to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract > > details > > from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY > > subsystem. > > > > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut > > Cc: Simon Glass > > Cc: Tom Rini > > Well, bump ? > > This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working > properly. > >>> > >>> I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon had > >>> a > >>> long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a > >>> 'fallback' to > >>> find a node with no compatible string. > >>> > >>> Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a test > >>> case to cover this scenario. > >> > >> The fact that it works on a particular board is not tested enough? > >> Do we need a custom, special, synthetic test ? > >> > > > > I believe that's always been the requirement against the DM code > > changes. I was requested in the past when I changed something in the > > DM and I see other people were asked to do so. Like Alex said, it > > does > > not mean this patch was not tested enough, but to ensure future > > commits won't break this. > > So, do you have any suggestion how to implement this test ? It seems > Alex posed the same question. It doesn't seem to be trivial in the > context of sandbox. > >>> > >>> I suppose you need a PCI_DEVICE() declaration for sandbox, with an > >>> associated DT node and no compatible string. Then check that you can > >>> locate the device and that it read a DT property correctly. > >> > >> Is there any example of this stuff already ? > > > > See the bottom of swap_case.c. You might be able to add a new one of > > those, > > > > If you look at pci-controller2 in test.dts it has a device with a > > compatible string. You could try adding a second device with no > > compatible string. > > And how does that test anything ? > >>> > >>> You can test that your code actually attaches the DT node to the > >>> probed device. Without you code the test would fail. Wit it, it would > >>> pass. > >> > >> Well it won't, because the sandbox swap_case.c requires the compatible. > >> This all seems like a big hack to support virtual PCI devices. > >> > >> The driver binds with a compatible and then pins the read/write config > >> reg accessors to emulate their return values. Those include PCI IDs. So > >> you cannot instantiate virtual PCI device without this compatible string > >> and thus also cannot write such a test easily. > >> > >> Now I also understand where this whole discussion about compatible > >> strings came from though. > > > > The compatible string is needed for the emulation driver but not for > > the thing that connects to it. However as things stand you can't > > attach an emulator to a bus without nesting it under the device which > > it attaches to. > > > > I suspect the best answer is to move the emulator so it is a direct > > child of the bus. You would need to update sandbox_pci_get_emul() to > > call device_find_first_child() on 'bus' instead of 'dev'. > > Sounds to me _way_ out of scope for this patchset. Dynamic binding is already supported on Sandbox. I guess Simon may have missed the part. Regards, Bin
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
Hi Marek, On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 4:19 PM Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 09/18/2018 03:52 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 8:01 PM Marek Vasut wrote: > >> > >> On 09/14/2018 06:41 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > >>> Hi Marek, > >>> > >>> On 10 September 2018 at 01:38, Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 09/02/2018 03:07 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > Hi, > > > On 1 September 2018 at 16:45, Marek Vasut wrote: > >> > >> On 09/01/2018 11:50 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > >>> Hi Marek, > >>> > >>> On 30 August 2018 at 07:42, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 08/30/2018 03:32 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > > > On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:07 AM Marek Vasut > > wrote: > >> > >> On 08/29/2018 05:15 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > >>> +Simon > >>> > >>> Hi Marek, > >>> > >>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut > >>> wrote: > > On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > > The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra > > properties > > of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI > > controller > > on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns a > > node > > to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract > > details > > from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY > > subsystem. > > > > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut > > Cc: Simon Glass > > Cc: Tom Rini > > Well, bump ? > > This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working > properly. > >>> > >>> I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon had > >>> a > >>> long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a > >>> 'fallback' to > >>> find a node with no compatible string. > >>> > >>> Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a test > >>> case to cover this scenario. > >> > >> The fact that it works on a particular board is not tested enough? > >> Do we need a custom, special, synthetic test ? > >> > > > > I believe that's always been the requirement against the DM code > > changes. I was requested in the past when I changed something in the > > DM and I see other people were asked to do so. Like Alex said, it > > does > > not mean this patch was not tested enough, but to ensure future > > commits won't break this. > > So, do you have any suggestion how to implement this test ? It seems > Alex posed the same question. It doesn't seem to be trivial in the > context of sandbox. > >>> > >>> I suppose you need a PCI_DEVICE() declaration for sandbox, with an > >>> associated DT node and no compatible string. Then check that you can > >>> locate the device and that it read a DT property correctly. > >> > >> Is there any example of this stuff already ? > > > > See the bottom of swap_case.c. You might be able to add a new one of > > those, > > > > If you look at pci-controller2 in test.dts it has a device with a > > compatible string. You could try adding a second device with no > > compatible string. > > And how does that test anything ? > >>> > >>> You can test that your code actually attaches the DT node to the > >>> probed device. Without you code the test would fail. Wit it, it would > >>> pass. > >> > >> Well it won't, because the sandbox swap_case.c requires the compatible. > >> This all seems like a big hack to support virtual PCI devices. > >> > > > > The sandbox swap_case.c indeed supports dynamic driver binding, just > > like real PCI devices. Please check doc/driver-model/pci-info.txt > > (since you were modifying the same doc, I guess you missed that part > > ..) > > Any specific part I am looking for ? In the pci-info.txt, search for "The sandbox PCI drivers also support dynamic driver binding". The arch/sandbox/dts/test.dts already has one PCI controller and two swap_case devices setup for this testing. You can start from there. Regards, Bin ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
On 09/18/2018 03:52 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Marek, > > On 18 September 2018 at 13:36, Marek Vasut wrote: >> >> On 09/14/2018 06:41 AM, Simon Glass wrote: >>> Hi Marek, >>> >>> On 10 September 2018 at 01:38, Marek Vasut wrote: On 09/02/2018 03:07 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Marek, Hi, > On 1 September 2018 at 16:45, Marek Vasut wrote: >> >> On 09/01/2018 11:50 PM, Simon Glass wrote: >>> Hi Marek, >>> >>> On 30 August 2018 at 07:42, Marek Vasut wrote: On 08/30/2018 03:32 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > Hi Marek, > > On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:07 AM Marek Vasut > wrote: >> >> On 08/29/2018 05:15 PM, Bin Meng wrote: >>> +Simon >>> >>> Hi Marek, >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut >>> wrote: On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra > properties > of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI > controller > on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns a > node > to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract details > from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY subsystem. > > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut > Cc: Simon Glass > Cc: Tom Rini Well, bump ? This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working properly. >>> >>> I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon had a >>> long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a 'fallback' >>> to >>> find a node with no compatible string. >>> >>> Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a test >>> case to cover this scenario. >> >> The fact that it works on a particular board is not tested enough? >> Do we need a custom, special, synthetic test ? >> > > I believe that's always been the requirement against the DM code > changes. I was requested in the past when I changed something in the > DM and I see other people were asked to do so. Like Alex said, it does > not mean this patch was not tested enough, but to ensure future > commits won't break this. So, do you have any suggestion how to implement this test ? It seems Alex posed the same question. It doesn't seem to be trivial in the context of sandbox. >>> >>> I suppose you need a PCI_DEVICE() declaration for sandbox, with an >>> associated DT node and no compatible string. Then check that you can >>> locate the device and that it read a DT property correctly. >> >> Is there any example of this stuff already ? > > See the bottom of swap_case.c. You might be able to add a new one of > those, > > If you look at pci-controller2 in test.dts it has a device with a > compatible string. You could try adding a second device with no > compatible string. And how does that test anything ? >>> >>> You can test that your code actually attaches the DT node to the >>> probed device. Without you code the test would fail. Wit it, it would >>> pass. >> >> Well it won't, because the sandbox swap_case.c requires the compatible. >> This all seems like a big hack to support virtual PCI devices. >> >> The driver binds with a compatible and then pins the read/write config >> reg accessors to emulate their return values. Those include PCI IDs. So >> you cannot instantiate virtual PCI device without this compatible string >> and thus also cannot write such a test easily. >> >> Now I also understand where this whole discussion about compatible >> strings came from though. > > The compatible string is needed for the emulation driver but not for > the thing that connects to it. However as things stand you can't > attach an emulator to a bus without nesting it under the device which > it attaches to. > > I suspect the best answer is to move the emulator so it is a direct > child of the bus. You would need to update sandbox_pci_get_emul() to > call device_find_first_child() on 'bus' instead of 'dev'. Sounds to me _way_ out of scope for this patchset. -- Best regards, Marek Vasut ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
On 09/18/2018 03:52 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > Hi Marek, > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 8:01 PM Marek Vasut wrote: >> >> On 09/14/2018 06:41 AM, Simon Glass wrote: >>> Hi Marek, >>> >>> On 10 September 2018 at 01:38, Marek Vasut wrote: On 09/02/2018 03:07 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Marek, Hi, > On 1 September 2018 at 16:45, Marek Vasut wrote: >> >> On 09/01/2018 11:50 PM, Simon Glass wrote: >>> Hi Marek, >>> >>> On 30 August 2018 at 07:42, Marek Vasut wrote: On 08/30/2018 03:32 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > Hi Marek, > > On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:07 AM Marek Vasut > wrote: >> >> On 08/29/2018 05:15 PM, Bin Meng wrote: >>> +Simon >>> >>> Hi Marek, >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut >>> wrote: On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra > properties > of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI > controller > on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns a > node > to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract details > from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY subsystem. > > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut > Cc: Simon Glass > Cc: Tom Rini Well, bump ? This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working properly. >>> >>> I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon had a >>> long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a 'fallback' >>> to >>> find a node with no compatible string. >>> >>> Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a test >>> case to cover this scenario. >> >> The fact that it works on a particular board is not tested enough? >> Do we need a custom, special, synthetic test ? >> > > I believe that's always been the requirement against the DM code > changes. I was requested in the past when I changed something in the > DM and I see other people were asked to do so. Like Alex said, it does > not mean this patch was not tested enough, but to ensure future > commits won't break this. So, do you have any suggestion how to implement this test ? It seems Alex posed the same question. It doesn't seem to be trivial in the context of sandbox. >>> >>> I suppose you need a PCI_DEVICE() declaration for sandbox, with an >>> associated DT node and no compatible string. Then check that you can >>> locate the device and that it read a DT property correctly. >> >> Is there any example of this stuff already ? > > See the bottom of swap_case.c. You might be able to add a new one of > those, > > If you look at pci-controller2 in test.dts it has a device with a > compatible string. You could try adding a second device with no > compatible string. And how does that test anything ? >>> >>> You can test that your code actually attaches the DT node to the >>> probed device. Without you code the test would fail. Wit it, it would >>> pass. >> >> Well it won't, because the sandbox swap_case.c requires the compatible. >> This all seems like a big hack to support virtual PCI devices. >> > > The sandbox swap_case.c indeed supports dynamic driver binding, just > like real PCI devices. Please check doc/driver-model/pci-info.txt > (since you were modifying the same doc, I guess you missed that part > ..) Any specific part I am looking for ? -- Best regards, Marek Vasut ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
Hi Marek, On 18 September 2018 at 13:36, Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 09/14/2018 06:41 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > > > On 10 September 2018 at 01:38, Marek Vasut wrote: > >> > >> On 09/02/2018 03:07 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > >>> Hi Marek, > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >>> On 1 September 2018 at 16:45, Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 09/01/2018 11:50 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > > > On 30 August 2018 at 07:42, Marek Vasut wrote: > >> On 08/30/2018 03:32 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > >>> Hi Marek, > >>> > >>> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:07 AM Marek Vasut > >>> wrote: > > On 08/29/2018 05:15 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > > +Simon > > > > Hi Marek, > > > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut > > wrote: > >> > >> On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > >>> The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra > >>> properties > >>> of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI > >>> controller > >>> on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns a > >>> node > >>> to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract details > >>> from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY subsystem. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut > >>> Cc: Simon Glass > >>> Cc: Tom Rini > >> > >> Well, bump ? > >> > >> This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working properly. > > > > I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon had a > > long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a 'fallback' > > to > > find a node with no compatible string. > > > > Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a test > > case to cover this scenario. > > The fact that it works on a particular board is not tested enough? > Do we need a custom, special, synthetic test ? > > >>> > >>> I believe that's always been the requirement against the DM code > >>> changes. I was requested in the past when I changed something in the > >>> DM and I see other people were asked to do so. Like Alex said, it does > >>> not mean this patch was not tested enough, but to ensure future > >>> commits won't break this. > >> > >> So, do you have any suggestion how to implement this test ? It seems > >> Alex posed the same question. It doesn't seem to be trivial in the > >> context of sandbox. > > > > I suppose you need a PCI_DEVICE() declaration for sandbox, with an > > associated DT node and no compatible string. Then check that you can > > locate the device and that it read a DT property correctly. > > Is there any example of this stuff already ? > >>> > >>> See the bottom of swap_case.c. You might be able to add a new one of > >>> those, > >>> > >>> If you look at pci-controller2 in test.dts it has a device with a > >>> compatible string. You could try adding a second device with no > >>> compatible string. > >> > >> And how does that test anything ? > > > > You can test that your code actually attaches the DT node to the > > probed device. Without you code the test would fail. Wit it, it would > > pass. > > Well it won't, because the sandbox swap_case.c requires the compatible. > This all seems like a big hack to support virtual PCI devices. > > The driver binds with a compatible and then pins the read/write config > reg accessors to emulate their return values. Those include PCI IDs. So > you cannot instantiate virtual PCI device without this compatible string > and thus also cannot write such a test easily. > > Now I also understand where this whole discussion about compatible > strings came from though. The compatible string is needed for the emulation driver but not for the thing that connects to it. However as things stand you can't attach an emulator to a bus without nesting it under the device which it attaches to. I suspect the best answer is to move the emulator so it is a direct child of the bus. You would need to update sandbox_pci_get_emul() to call device_find_first_child() on 'bus' instead of 'dev'. Regards, Simon ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
Hi Marek, On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 8:01 PM Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 09/14/2018 06:41 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > > > On 10 September 2018 at 01:38, Marek Vasut wrote: > >> > >> On 09/02/2018 03:07 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > >>> Hi Marek, > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >>> On 1 September 2018 at 16:45, Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 09/01/2018 11:50 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > > > On 30 August 2018 at 07:42, Marek Vasut wrote: > >> On 08/30/2018 03:32 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > >>> Hi Marek, > >>> > >>> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:07 AM Marek Vasut > >>> wrote: > > On 08/29/2018 05:15 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > > +Simon > > > > Hi Marek, > > > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut > > wrote: > >> > >> On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > >>> The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra > >>> properties > >>> of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI > >>> controller > >>> on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns a > >>> node > >>> to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract details > >>> from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY subsystem. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut > >>> Cc: Simon Glass > >>> Cc: Tom Rini > >> > >> Well, bump ? > >> > >> This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working properly. > > > > I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon had a > > long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a 'fallback' > > to > > find a node with no compatible string. > > > > Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a test > > case to cover this scenario. > > The fact that it works on a particular board is not tested enough? > Do we need a custom, special, synthetic test ? > > >>> > >>> I believe that's always been the requirement against the DM code > >>> changes. I was requested in the past when I changed something in the > >>> DM and I see other people were asked to do so. Like Alex said, it does > >>> not mean this patch was not tested enough, but to ensure future > >>> commits won't break this. > >> > >> So, do you have any suggestion how to implement this test ? It seems > >> Alex posed the same question. It doesn't seem to be trivial in the > >> context of sandbox. > > > > I suppose you need a PCI_DEVICE() declaration for sandbox, with an > > associated DT node and no compatible string. Then check that you can > > locate the device and that it read a DT property correctly. > > Is there any example of this stuff already ? > >>> > >>> See the bottom of swap_case.c. You might be able to add a new one of > >>> those, > >>> > >>> If you look at pci-controller2 in test.dts it has a device with a > >>> compatible string. You could try adding a second device with no > >>> compatible string. > >> > >> And how does that test anything ? > > > > You can test that your code actually attaches the DT node to the > > probed device. Without you code the test would fail. Wit it, it would > > pass. > > Well it won't, because the sandbox swap_case.c requires the compatible. > This all seems like a big hack to support virtual PCI devices. > The sandbox swap_case.c indeed supports dynamic driver binding, just like real PCI devices. Please check doc/driver-model/pci-info.txt (since you were modifying the same doc, I guess you missed that part ..) > The driver binds with a compatible and then pins the read/write config > reg accessors to emulate their return values. Those include PCI IDs. So > you cannot instantiate virtual PCI device without this compatible string > and thus also cannot write such a test easily. > > Now I also understand where this whole discussion about compatible > strings came from though. Regards, Bin ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
On 09/14/2018 06:41 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Marek, > > On 10 September 2018 at 01:38, Marek Vasut wrote: >> >> On 09/02/2018 03:07 AM, Simon Glass wrote: >>> Hi Marek, >> >> Hi, >> >>> On 1 September 2018 at 16:45, Marek Vasut wrote: On 09/01/2018 11:50 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Marek, > > On 30 August 2018 at 07:42, Marek Vasut wrote: >> On 08/30/2018 03:32 PM, Bin Meng wrote: >>> Hi Marek, >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:07 AM Marek Vasut >>> wrote: On 08/29/2018 05:15 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > +Simon > > Hi Marek, > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut > wrote: >> >> On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: >>> The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra properties >>> of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI controller >>> on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns a node >>> to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract details >>> from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY subsystem. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut >>> Cc: Simon Glass >>> Cc: Tom Rini >> >> Well, bump ? >> >> This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working properly. > > I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon had a > long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a 'fallback' to > find a node with no compatible string. > > Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a test > case to cover this scenario. The fact that it works on a particular board is not tested enough? Do we need a custom, special, synthetic test ? >>> >>> I believe that's always been the requirement against the DM code >>> changes. I was requested in the past when I changed something in the >>> DM and I see other people were asked to do so. Like Alex said, it does >>> not mean this patch was not tested enough, but to ensure future >>> commits won't break this. >> >> So, do you have any suggestion how to implement this test ? It seems >> Alex posed the same question. It doesn't seem to be trivial in the >> context of sandbox. > > I suppose you need a PCI_DEVICE() declaration for sandbox, with an > associated DT node and no compatible string. Then check that you can > locate the device and that it read a DT property correctly. Is there any example of this stuff already ? >>> >>> See the bottom of swap_case.c. You might be able to add a new one of those, >>> >>> If you look at pci-controller2 in test.dts it has a device with a >>> compatible string. You could try adding a second device with no >>> compatible string. >> >> And how does that test anything ? > > You can test that your code actually attaches the DT node to the > probed device. Without you code the test would fail. Wit it, it would > pass. Well it won't, because the sandbox swap_case.c requires the compatible. This all seems like a big hack to support virtual PCI devices. The driver binds with a compatible and then pins the read/write config reg accessors to emulate their return values. Those include PCI IDs. So you cannot instantiate virtual PCI device without this compatible string and thus also cannot write such a test easily. Now I also understand where this whole discussion about compatible strings came from though. -- Best regards, Marek Vasut ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
Hi Marek, On 10 September 2018 at 01:38, Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 09/02/2018 03:07 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > Hi, > > > On 1 September 2018 at 16:45, Marek Vasut wrote: > >> > >> On 09/01/2018 11:50 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > >>> Hi Marek, > >>> > >>> On 30 August 2018 at 07:42, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 08/30/2018 03:32 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > > > On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:07 AM Marek Vasut > > wrote: > >> > >> On 08/29/2018 05:15 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > >>> +Simon > >>> > >>> Hi Marek, > >>> > >>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut > >>> wrote: > > On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > > The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra properties > > of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI controller > > on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns a node > > to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract details > > from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY subsystem. > > > > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut > > Cc: Simon Glass > > Cc: Tom Rini > > Well, bump ? > > This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working properly. > >>> > >>> I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon had a > >>> long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a 'fallback' to > >>> find a node with no compatible string. > >>> > >>> Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a test > >>> case to cover this scenario. > >> > >> The fact that it works on a particular board is not tested enough? > >> Do we need a custom, special, synthetic test ? > >> > > > > I believe that's always been the requirement against the DM code > > changes. I was requested in the past when I changed something in the > > DM and I see other people were asked to do so. Like Alex said, it does > > not mean this patch was not tested enough, but to ensure future > > commits won't break this. > > So, do you have any suggestion how to implement this test ? It seems > Alex posed the same question. It doesn't seem to be trivial in the > context of sandbox. > >>> > >>> I suppose you need a PCI_DEVICE() declaration for sandbox, with an > >>> associated DT node and no compatible string. Then check that you can > >>> locate the device and that it read a DT property correctly. > >> > >> Is there any example of this stuff already ? > > > > See the bottom of swap_case.c. You might be able to add a new one of those, > > > > If you look at pci-controller2 in test.dts it has a device with a > > compatible string. You could try adding a second device with no > > compatible string. > > And how does that test anything ? You can test that your code actually attaches the DT node to the probed device. Without you code the test would fail. Wit it, it would pass. Regards, Simon ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
On 09/02/2018 03:07 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Marek, Hi, > On 1 September 2018 at 16:45, Marek Vasut wrote: >> >> On 09/01/2018 11:50 PM, Simon Glass wrote: >>> Hi Marek, >>> >>> On 30 August 2018 at 07:42, Marek Vasut wrote: On 08/30/2018 03:32 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > Hi Marek, > > On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:07 AM Marek Vasut wrote: >> >> On 08/29/2018 05:15 PM, Bin Meng wrote: >>> +Simon >>> >>> Hi Marek, >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut >>> wrote: On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra properties > of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI controller > on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns a node > to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract details > from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY subsystem. > > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut > Cc: Simon Glass > Cc: Tom Rini Well, bump ? This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working properly. >>> >>> I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon had a >>> long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a 'fallback' to >>> find a node with no compatible string. >>> >>> Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a test >>> case to cover this scenario. >> >> The fact that it works on a particular board is not tested enough? >> Do we need a custom, special, synthetic test ? >> > > I believe that's always been the requirement against the DM code > changes. I was requested in the past when I changed something in the > DM and I see other people were asked to do so. Like Alex said, it does > not mean this patch was not tested enough, but to ensure future > commits won't break this. So, do you have any suggestion how to implement this test ? It seems Alex posed the same question. It doesn't seem to be trivial in the context of sandbox. >>> >>> I suppose you need a PCI_DEVICE() declaration for sandbox, with an >>> associated DT node and no compatible string. Then check that you can >>> locate the device and that it read a DT property correctly. >> >> Is there any example of this stuff already ? > > See the bottom of swap_case.c. You might be able to add a new one of those, > > If you look at pci-controller2 in test.dts it has a device with a > compatible string. You could try adding a second device with no > compatible string. And how does that test anything ? -- Best regards, Marek Vasut ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
Hi Marek, On 1 September 2018 at 16:45, Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 09/01/2018 11:50 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Marek, > > > > On 30 August 2018 at 07:42, Marek Vasut wrote: > >> On 08/30/2018 03:32 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > >>> Hi Marek, > >>> > >>> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:07 AM Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 08/29/2018 05:15 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > > +Simon > > > > Hi Marek, > > > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut > > wrote: > >> > >> On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > >>> The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra properties > >>> of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI controller > >>> on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns a node > >>> to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract details > >>> from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY subsystem. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut > >>> Cc: Simon Glass > >>> Cc: Tom Rini > >> > >> Well, bump ? > >> > >> This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working properly. > > > > I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon had a > > long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a 'fallback' to > > find a node with no compatible string. > > > > Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a test > > case to cover this scenario. > > The fact that it works on a particular board is not tested enough? > Do we need a custom, special, synthetic test ? > > >>> > >>> I believe that's always been the requirement against the DM code > >>> changes. I was requested in the past when I changed something in the > >>> DM and I see other people were asked to do so. Like Alex said, it does > >>> not mean this patch was not tested enough, but to ensure future > >>> commits won't break this. > >> > >> So, do you have any suggestion how to implement this test ? It seems > >> Alex posed the same question. It doesn't seem to be trivial in the > >> context of sandbox. > > > > I suppose you need a PCI_DEVICE() declaration for sandbox, with an > > associated DT node and no compatible string. Then check that you can > > locate the device and that it read a DT property correctly. > > Is there any example of this stuff already ? See the bottom of swap_case.c. You might be able to add a new one of those, If you look at pci-controller2 in test.dts it has a device with a compatible string. You could try adding a second device with no compatible string. > > Anyway, any feedback on the patch ? Did you test it ? I again only see > "do this random stuff and that random stuff" , but zero actual feedback. > > >>> > >>> If "this and that random stuff" means test case I asked for, please > >>> check my proposal on the v1 patch thread which indicated that a proper > >>> test case should be created. You seems to have missed that. > >> > >> So, any feedback on this actual patch ? > > > > What is 'potention'? > > potential typo . > > > Is there any check needed that it does not attach the same DT node to > > two different devices? Or perhaps that cannot happen, since we > > shouldn't expect two nodes to share a BDF? > > I guess it could happen and I didn't find a good solution to this even > in Linux. The current take on this possibility seems to be "let's live > with it". OK. > > > I think it looks OK, assuming this is the way we want to go. > > > > Regards, > > Simon > > > > > -- > Best regards, > Marek Vasut Regards, Simon ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
On 09/01/2018 11:50 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Marek, > > On 30 August 2018 at 07:42, Marek Vasut wrote: >> On 08/30/2018 03:32 PM, Bin Meng wrote: >>> Hi Marek, >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:07 AM Marek Vasut wrote: On 08/29/2018 05:15 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > +Simon > > Hi Marek, > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut > wrote: >> >> On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: >>> The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra properties >>> of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI controller >>> on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns a node >>> to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract details >>> from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY subsystem. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut >>> Cc: Simon Glass >>> Cc: Tom Rini >> >> Well, bump ? >> >> This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working properly. > > I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon had a > long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a 'fallback' to > find a node with no compatible string. > > Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a test > case to cover this scenario. The fact that it works on a particular board is not tested enough? Do we need a custom, special, synthetic test ? >>> >>> I believe that's always been the requirement against the DM code >>> changes. I was requested in the past when I changed something in the >>> DM and I see other people were asked to do so. Like Alex said, it does >>> not mean this patch was not tested enough, but to ensure future >>> commits won't break this. >> >> So, do you have any suggestion how to implement this test ? It seems >> Alex posed the same question. It doesn't seem to be trivial in the >> context of sandbox. > > I suppose you need a PCI_DEVICE() declaration for sandbox, with an > associated DT node and no compatible string. Then check that you can > locate the device and that it read a DT property correctly. Is there any example of this stuff already ? Anyway, any feedback on the patch ? Did you test it ? I again only see "do this random stuff and that random stuff" , but zero actual feedback. >>> >>> If "this and that random stuff" means test case I asked for, please >>> check my proposal on the v1 patch thread which indicated that a proper >>> test case should be created. You seems to have missed that. >> >> So, any feedback on this actual patch ? > > What is 'potention'? potential typo . > Is there any check needed that it does not attach the same DT node to > two different devices? Or perhaps that cannot happen, since we > shouldn't expect two nodes to share a BDF? I guess it could happen and I didn't find a good solution to this even in Linux. The current take on this possibility seems to be "let's live with it". > I think it looks OK, assuming this is the way we want to go. > > Regards, > Simon > -- Best regards, Marek Vasut ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
Hi Marek, On 30 August 2018 at 07:42, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 08/30/2018 03:32 PM, Bin Meng wrote: >> Hi Marek, >> >> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:07 AM Marek Vasut wrote: >>> >>> On 08/29/2018 05:15 PM, Bin Meng wrote: +Simon Hi Marek, On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: >> The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra properties >> of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI controller >> on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns a node >> to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract details >> from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY subsystem. >> >> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut >> Cc: Simon Glass >> Cc: Tom Rini > > Well, bump ? > > This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working properly. I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon had a long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a 'fallback' to find a node with no compatible string. Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a test case to cover this scenario. >>> >>> The fact that it works on a particular board is not tested enough? >>> Do we need a custom, special, synthetic test ? >>> >> >> I believe that's always been the requirement against the DM code >> changes. I was requested in the past when I changed something in the >> DM and I see other people were asked to do so. Like Alex said, it does >> not mean this patch was not tested enough, but to ensure future >> commits won't break this. > > So, do you have any suggestion how to implement this test ? It seems > Alex posed the same question. It doesn't seem to be trivial in the > context of sandbox. I suppose you need a PCI_DEVICE() declaration for sandbox, with an associated DT node and no compatible string. Then check that you can locate the device and that it read a DT property correctly. > >>> Anyway, any feedback on the patch ? Did you test it ? I again only see >>> "do this random stuff and that random stuff" , but zero actual feedback. >>> >> >> If "this and that random stuff" means test case I asked for, please >> check my proposal on the v1 patch thread which indicated that a proper >> test case should be created. You seems to have missed that. > > So, any feedback on this actual patch ? What is 'potention'? Is there any check needed that it does not attach the same DT node to two different devices? Or perhaps that cannot happen, since we shouldn't expect two nodes to share a BDF? I think it looks OK, assuming this is the way we want to go. Regards, Simon ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
On 08/30/2018 03:32 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > Hi Marek, > > On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:07 AM Marek Vasut wrote: >> >> On 08/29/2018 05:15 PM, Bin Meng wrote: >>> +Simon >>> >>> Hi Marek, >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut wrote: On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra properties > of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI controller > on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns a node > to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract details > from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY subsystem. > > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut > Cc: Simon Glass > Cc: Tom Rini Well, bump ? This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working properly. >>> >>> I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon had a >>> long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a 'fallback' to >>> find a node with no compatible string. >>> >>> Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a test >>> case to cover this scenario. >> >> The fact that it works on a particular board is not tested enough? >> Do we need a custom, special, synthetic test ? >> > > I believe that's always been the requirement against the DM code > changes. I was requested in the past when I changed something in the > DM and I see other people were asked to do so. Like Alex said, it does > not mean this patch was not tested enough, but to ensure future > commits won't break this. So, do you have any suggestion how to implement this test ? It seems Alex posed the same question. It doesn't seem to be trivial in the context of sandbox. >> Anyway, any feedback on the patch ? Did you test it ? I again only see >> "do this random stuff and that random stuff" , but zero actual feedback. >> > > If "this and that random stuff" means test case I asked for, please > check my proposal on the v1 patch thread which indicated that a proper > test case should be created. You seems to have missed that. So, any feedback on this actual patch ? -- Best regards, Marek Vasut ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
Hi Marek, On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 1:07 AM Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 08/29/2018 05:15 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > > +Simon > > > > Hi Marek, > > > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut wrote: > >> > >> On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > >>> The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra properties > >>> of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI controller > >>> on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns a node > >>> to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract details > >>> from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY subsystem. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut > >>> Cc: Simon Glass > >>> Cc: Tom Rini > >> > >> Well, bump ? > >> > >> This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working properly. > > > > I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon had a > > long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a 'fallback' to > > find a node with no compatible string. > > > > Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a test > > case to cover this scenario. > > The fact that it works on a particular board is not tested enough? > Do we need a custom, special, synthetic test ? > I believe that's always been the requirement against the DM code changes. I was requested in the past when I changed something in the DM and I see other people were asked to do so. Like Alex said, it does not mean this patch was not tested enough, but to ensure future commits won't break this. > Anyway, any feedback on the patch ? Did you test it ? I again only see > "do this random stuff and that random stuff" , but zero actual feedback. > If "this and that random stuff" means test case I asked for, please check my proposal on the v1 patch thread which indicated that a proper test case should be created. You seems to have missed that. Regards, Bin ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
On 29.08.18 19:07, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 08/29/2018 05:15 PM, Bin Meng wrote: >> +Simon >> >> Hi Marek, >> >> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut wrote: >>> >>> On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra properties of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI controller on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns a node to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract details from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY subsystem. Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut Cc: Simon Glass Cc: Tom Rini >>> >>> Well, bump ? >>> >>> This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working properly. >> >> I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon had a >> long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a 'fallback' to >> find a node with no compatible string. >> >> Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a test >> case to cover this scenario. > > The fact that it works on a particular board is not tested enough? > Do we need a custom, special, synthetic test ? I agree that we should include test coverage for this case in some automated fashion, so that nobody breaks support for it by accident. What's the easiest way to get us there? > Anyway, any feedback on the patch ? Did you test it ? I again only see > "do this random stuff and that random stuff" , but zero actual feedback. I think "potention" is a typo in your patch. Apart from that the logic feels very sound to me though. It's perfectly valid in DT to refer to subdevices by reg only. Alex ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
On 08/29/2018 05:15 PM, Bin Meng wrote: > +Simon > > Hi Marek, > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut wrote: >> >> On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: >>> The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra properties >>> of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI controller >>> on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns a node >>> to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract details >>> from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY subsystem. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut >>> Cc: Simon Glass >>> Cc: Tom Rini >> >> Well, bump ? >> >> This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working properly. > > I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon had a > long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a 'fallback' to > find a node with no compatible string. > > Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a test > case to cover this scenario. The fact that it works on a particular board is not tested enough? Do we need a custom, special, synthetic test ? Anyway, any feedback on the patch ? Did you test it ? I again only see "do this random stuff and that random stuff" , but zero actual feedback. -- Best regards, Marek Vasut ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
+Simon Hi Marek, On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:22 PM Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > > The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra properties > > of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI controller > > on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns a node > > to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract details > > from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY subsystem. > > > > Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut > > Cc: Simon Glass > > Cc: Tom Rini > > Well, bump ? > > This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working properly. I don't think we ever had an agreement on the v1 patch. Simon had a long email that pointed out what Linux does seems like a 'fallback' to find a node with no compatible string. Back to this, if we have to go with this way, please create a test case to cover this scenario. Regards, Bin ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
On 08/24/2018 08:27 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra properties
> of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI controller
> on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns a node
> to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract details
> from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY subsystem.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut
> Cc: Simon Glass
> Cc: Tom Rini
Well, bump ?
This is the only missing patch to get my hardware working properly.
> ---
> V2: Move the whole machinery to pci_bind_bus_devices(), right after
> the driver instance platform data are updated. This reduces the
> number of times the DT is traversed and works for both DT nodes
> with and without compat string.
> ---
> drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c | 15 +++
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c b/drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c
> index e9671d9b76..cf3e38a6f2 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c
> @@ -733,6 +733,7 @@ int pci_bind_bus_devices(struct udevice *bus)
> ulong vendor, device;
> ulong header_type;
> pci_dev_t bdf, end;
> + ofnode node;
> bool found_multi;
> int ret;
>
> @@ -803,6 +804,20 @@ int pci_bind_bus_devices(struct udevice *bus)
> pplat->vendor = vendor;
> pplat->device = device;
> pplat->class = class;
> +
> + /* Associate potention OF node */
> + dev_for_each_subnode(node, bus) {
> + phys_addr_t df, size;
> + df = ofnode_get_addr_size(node, "reg", );
> + if (df == FDT_ADDR_T_NONE)
> + continue;
> +
> + if (PCI_FUNC(df) == PCI_FUNC(bdf) &&
> + PCI_DEV(df) == PCI_DEV(bdf)) {
> + dev->node = node;
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> }
>
> return 0;
>
--
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
[U-Boot] [PATCH V2 1/2] pci: Support parsing PCI controller DT subnodes
The PCI controller can have DT subnodes describing extra properties
of particular PCI devices, ie. a PHY attached to an EHCI controller
on a PCI bus. This patch parses those DT subnodes and assigns a node
to the PCI device instance, so that the driver can extract details
from that node and ie. configure the PHY using the PHY subsystem.
Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut
Cc: Simon Glass
Cc: Tom Rini
---
V2: Move the whole machinery to pci_bind_bus_devices(), right after
the driver instance platform data are updated. This reduces the
number of times the DT is traversed and works for both DT nodes
with and without compat string.
---
drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c | 15 +++
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c b/drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c
index e9671d9b76..cf3e38a6f2 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c
@@ -733,6 +733,7 @@ int pci_bind_bus_devices(struct udevice *bus)
ulong vendor, device;
ulong header_type;
pci_dev_t bdf, end;
+ ofnode node;
bool found_multi;
int ret;
@@ -803,6 +804,20 @@ int pci_bind_bus_devices(struct udevice *bus)
pplat->vendor = vendor;
pplat->device = device;
pplat->class = class;
+
+ /* Associate potention OF node */
+ dev_for_each_subnode(node, bus) {
+ phys_addr_t df, size;
+ df = ofnode_get_addr_size(node, "reg", );
+ if (df == FDT_ADDR_T_NONE)
+ continue;
+
+ if (PCI_FUNC(df) == PCI_FUNC(bdf) &&
+ PCI_DEV(df) == PCI_DEV(bdf)) {
+ dev->node = node;
+ break;
+ }
+ }
}
return 0;
--
2.16.2
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
