Re: [RFC] hw/arm/virt: Provide DT binding generation for PCI eXpander Bridges

2023-04-26 Thread Jonathan Cameron via
On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 21:15:25 +0100 Peter Maydell wrote: > On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 at 18:37, Jonathan Cameron > wrote: > > We could explore only solving the problem for pxb-cxl for now. > > However, we would still be talking infrastructure in kernel only > > to support emulated CXL devices and I can

Re: [RFC] hw/arm/virt: Provide DT binding generation for PCI eXpander Bridges

2023-04-25 Thread Peter Maydell
On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 at 18:37, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > We could explore only solving the problem for pxb-cxl for now. > However, we would still be talking infrastructure in kernel only > to support emulated CXL devices and I can see that being > controversial. A normal CXL host bridge is not

Re: [RFC] hw/arm/virt: Provide DT binding generation for PCI eXpander Bridges

2023-04-25 Thread Jonathan Cameron via
On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 09:28:44 +0100 Peter Maydell wrote: > On Mon, 24 Apr 2023 at 22:56, Jonathan Cameron > wrote: > > > > On Mon, 24 Apr 2023 16:45:48 +0100 > > Peter Maydell wrote: > > > On the other hand, having QEMU enumerate PCI devices is *also* a > > > very different model from today,

Re: [RFC] hw/arm/virt: Provide DT binding generation for PCI eXpander Bridges

2023-04-25 Thread Peter Maydell
On Mon, 24 Apr 2023 at 22:56, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > On Mon, 24 Apr 2023 16:45:48 +0100 > Peter Maydell wrote: > > On the other hand, having QEMU enumerate PCI devices is *also* a > > very different model from today, where we assume that the guest > > code is the one that is going to deal

Re: [RFC] hw/arm/virt: Provide DT binding generation for PCI eXpander Bridges

2023-04-24 Thread Jonathan Cameron via
On Mon, 24 Apr 2023 16:45:48 +0100 Peter Maydell wrote: > On Mon, 24 Apr 2023 at 16:41, Jonathan Cameron > wrote: > > > > On Mon, 24 Apr 2023 10:28:30 +0100 > > Peter Maydell wrote: > > > So, not knowing anything about CXL, my naive question is: > > > this is PCI, why can't we handle it the

Re: [RFC] hw/arm/virt: Provide DT binding generation for PCI eXpander Bridges

2023-04-24 Thread Peter Maydell
On Mon, 24 Apr 2023 at 16:41, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > On Mon, 24 Apr 2023 10:28:30 +0100 > Peter Maydell wrote: > > So, not knowing anything about CXL, my naive question is: > > this is PCI, why can't we handle it the way we handle everything > > else PCI, i.e. present the PCI controller in

Re: [RFC] hw/arm/virt: Provide DT binding generation for PCI eXpander Bridges

2023-04-24 Thread Jonathan Cameron via
On Mon, 24 Apr 2023 10:28:30 +0100 Peter Maydell wrote: > On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 at 17:50, Jonathan Cameron > wrote: > > > > This patch and the problem it is trying to resolve will form part of a talk > > I will be giving next week at Linaro Connect. https://sched.co/1K85p > > > > So in the spirit

Re: [RFC] hw/arm/virt: Provide DT binding generation for PCI eXpander Bridges

2023-04-24 Thread Peter Maydell
On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 at 17:50, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > This patch and the problem it is trying to resolve will form part of a talk > I will be giving next week at Linaro Connect. https://sched.co/1K85p > > So in the spirit of giving people almost no warning... Plus being able to > say the

[RFC] hw/arm/virt: Provide DT binding generation for PCI eXpander Bridges

2023-04-21 Thread Jonathan Cameron via
This patch and the problem it is trying to resolve will form part of a talk I will be giving next week at Linaro Connect. https://sched.co/1K85p So in the spirit of giving people almost no warning... Plus being able to say the discussion has kicked off here is the simplest solution I could come