Searched hist:a131bfc6 (Results 1 – 4 of 4) sorted by relevance
| /openbmc/linux/arch/powerpc/kernel/ |
| H A D | eeh_pe.c | a131bfc6 Sat Jul 25 03:12:31 CDT 2020 Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@gmail.com> powerpc/eeh: Move PE tree setup into the platform
The EEH core has a concept of a "PE tree" to support PowerNV. The PE tree
follows the PCI bus structures because a reset asserted on an upstream
bridge will be propagated to the downstream bridges. On pseries there's a
1-1 correspondence between what the guest sees are a PHB and a PE so the
"tree" is really just a single node.
Current the EEH core is reponsible for setting up this PE tree which it
does by traversing the pci_dn tree. The structure of the pci_dn tree
matches the bus tree on PowerNV which leads to the PE tree being "correct"
this setup method doesn't make a whole lot of sense and it's actively
confusing for the pseries case where it doesn't really do anything.
We want to remove the dependence on pci_dn anyway so this patch move
choosing where to insert a new PE into the platform code rather than
being part of the generic EEH code. For PowerNV this simplifies the
tree building logic and removes the use of pci_dn. For pseries we
keep the existing logic. I'm not really convinced it does anything
due to the 1-1 PE-to-PHB correspondence so every device under that
PHB should be in the same PE, but I'd rather not remove it entirely
until we've had a chance to look at it more deeply.
Signed-off-by: Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200725081231.39076-14-oohall@gmail.com
a131bfc6 Sat Jul 25 03:12:31 CDT 2020 Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@gmail.com> powerpc/eeh: Move PE tree setup into the platform
The EEH core has a concept of a "PE tree" to support PowerNV. The PE tree
follows the PCI bus structures because a reset asserted on an upstream
bridge will be propagated to the downstream bridges. On pseries there's a
1-1 correspondence between what the guest sees are a PHB and a PE so the
"tree" is really just a single node.
Current the EEH core is reponsible for setting up this PE tree which it
does by traversing the pci_dn tree. The structure of the pci_dn tree
matches the bus tree on PowerNV which leads to the PE tree being "correct"
this setup method doesn't make a whole lot of sense and it's actively
confusing for the pseries case where it doesn't really do anything.
We want to remove the dependence on pci_dn anyway so this patch move
choosing where to insert a new PE into the platform code rather than
being part of the generic EEH code. For PowerNV this simplifies the
tree building logic and removes the use of pci_dn. For pseries we
keep the existing logic. I'm not really convinced it does anything
due to the 1-1 PE-to-PHB correspondence so every device under that
PHB should be in the same PE, but I'd rather not remove it entirely
until we've had a chance to look at it more deeply.
Signed-off-by: Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200725081231.39076-14-oohall@gmail.com
|
| /openbmc/linux/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/ |
| H A D | eeh_pseries.c | a131bfc6 Sat Jul 25 03:12:31 CDT 2020 Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@gmail.com> powerpc/eeh: Move PE tree setup into the platform
The EEH core has a concept of a "PE tree" to support PowerNV. The PE tree
follows the PCI bus structures because a reset asserted on an upstream
bridge will be propagated to the downstream bridges. On pseries there's a
1-1 correspondence between what the guest sees are a PHB and a PE so the
"tree" is really just a single node.
Current the EEH core is reponsible for setting up this PE tree which it
does by traversing the pci_dn tree. The structure of the pci_dn tree
matches the bus tree on PowerNV which leads to the PE tree being "correct"
this setup method doesn't make a whole lot of sense and it's actively
confusing for the pseries case where it doesn't really do anything.
We want to remove the dependence on pci_dn anyway so this patch move
choosing where to insert a new PE into the platform code rather than
being part of the generic EEH code. For PowerNV this simplifies the
tree building logic and removes the use of pci_dn. For pseries we
keep the existing logic. I'm not really convinced it does anything
due to the 1-1 PE-to-PHB correspondence so every device under that
PHB should be in the same PE, but I'd rather not remove it entirely
until we've had a chance to look at it more deeply.
Signed-off-by: Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200725081231.39076-14-oohall@gmail.com
a131bfc6 Sat Jul 25 03:12:31 CDT 2020 Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@gmail.com> powerpc/eeh: Move PE tree setup into the platform
The EEH core has a concept of a "PE tree" to support PowerNV. The PE tree
follows the PCI bus structures because a reset asserted on an upstream
bridge will be propagated to the downstream bridges. On pseries there's a
1-1 correspondence between what the guest sees are a PHB and a PE so the
"tree" is really just a single node.
Current the EEH core is reponsible for setting up this PE tree which it
does by traversing the pci_dn tree. The structure of the pci_dn tree
matches the bus tree on PowerNV which leads to the PE tree being "correct"
this setup method doesn't make a whole lot of sense and it's actively
confusing for the pseries case where it doesn't really do anything.
We want to remove the dependence on pci_dn anyway so this patch move
choosing where to insert a new PE into the platform code rather than
being part of the generic EEH code. For PowerNV this simplifies the
tree building logic and removes the use of pci_dn. For pseries we
keep the existing logic. I'm not really convinced it does anything
due to the 1-1 PE-to-PHB correspondence so every device under that
PHB should be in the same PE, but I'd rather not remove it entirely
until we've had a chance to look at it more deeply.
Signed-off-by: Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200725081231.39076-14-oohall@gmail.com
|
| /openbmc/linux/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/ |
| H A D | eeh-powernv.c | a131bfc6 Sat Jul 25 03:12:31 CDT 2020 Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@gmail.com> powerpc/eeh: Move PE tree setup into the platform
The EEH core has a concept of a "PE tree" to support PowerNV. The PE tree
follows the PCI bus structures because a reset asserted on an upstream
bridge will be propagated to the downstream bridges. On pseries there's a
1-1 correspondence between what the guest sees are a PHB and a PE so the
"tree" is really just a single node.
Current the EEH core is reponsible for setting up this PE tree which it
does by traversing the pci_dn tree. The structure of the pci_dn tree
matches the bus tree on PowerNV which leads to the PE tree being "correct"
this setup method doesn't make a whole lot of sense and it's actively
confusing for the pseries case where it doesn't really do anything.
We want to remove the dependence on pci_dn anyway so this patch move
choosing where to insert a new PE into the platform code rather than
being part of the generic EEH code. For PowerNV this simplifies the
tree building logic and removes the use of pci_dn. For pseries we
keep the existing logic. I'm not really convinced it does anything
due to the 1-1 PE-to-PHB correspondence so every device under that
PHB should be in the same PE, but I'd rather not remove it entirely
until we've had a chance to look at it more deeply.
Signed-off-by: Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200725081231.39076-14-oohall@gmail.com
a131bfc6 Sat Jul 25 03:12:31 CDT 2020 Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@gmail.com> powerpc/eeh: Move PE tree setup into the platform
The EEH core has a concept of a "PE tree" to support PowerNV. The PE tree
follows the PCI bus structures because a reset asserted on an upstream
bridge will be propagated to the downstream bridges. On pseries there's a
1-1 correspondence between what the guest sees are a PHB and a PE so the
"tree" is really just a single node.
Current the EEH core is reponsible for setting up this PE tree which it
does by traversing the pci_dn tree. The structure of the pci_dn tree
matches the bus tree on PowerNV which leads to the PE tree being "correct"
this setup method doesn't make a whole lot of sense and it's actively
confusing for the pseries case where it doesn't really do anything.
We want to remove the dependence on pci_dn anyway so this patch move
choosing where to insert a new PE into the platform code rather than
being part of the generic EEH code. For PowerNV this simplifies the
tree building logic and removes the use of pci_dn. For pseries we
keep the existing logic. I'm not really convinced it does anything
due to the 1-1 PE-to-PHB correspondence so every device under that
PHB should be in the same PE, but I'd rather not remove it entirely
until we've had a chance to look at it more deeply.
Signed-off-by: Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200725081231.39076-14-oohall@gmail.com
|
| /openbmc/linux/arch/powerpc/include/asm/ |
| H A D | eeh.h | a131bfc6 Sat Jul 25 03:12:31 CDT 2020 Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@gmail.com> powerpc/eeh: Move PE tree setup into the platform
The EEH core has a concept of a "PE tree" to support PowerNV. The PE tree
follows the PCI bus structures because a reset asserted on an upstream
bridge will be propagated to the downstream bridges. On pseries there's a
1-1 correspondence between what the guest sees are a PHB and a PE so the
"tree" is really just a single node.
Current the EEH core is reponsible for setting up this PE tree which it
does by traversing the pci_dn tree. The structure of the pci_dn tree
matches the bus tree on PowerNV which leads to the PE tree being "correct"
this setup method doesn't make a whole lot of sense and it's actively
confusing for the pseries case where it doesn't really do anything.
We want to remove the dependence on pci_dn anyway so this patch move
choosing where to insert a new PE into the platform code rather than
being part of the generic EEH code. For PowerNV this simplifies the
tree building logic and removes the use of pci_dn. For pseries we
keep the existing logic. I'm not really convinced it does anything
due to the 1-1 PE-to-PHB correspondence so every device under that
PHB should be in the same PE, but I'd rather not remove it entirely
until we've had a chance to look at it more deeply.
Signed-off-by: Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200725081231.39076-14-oohall@gmail.com
a131bfc6 Sat Jul 25 03:12:31 CDT 2020 Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@gmail.com> powerpc/eeh: Move PE tree setup into the platform
The EEH core has a concept of a "PE tree" to support PowerNV. The PE tree
follows the PCI bus structures because a reset asserted on an upstream
bridge will be propagated to the downstream bridges. On pseries there's a
1-1 correspondence between what the guest sees are a PHB and a PE so the
"tree" is really just a single node.
Current the EEH core is reponsible for setting up this PE tree which it
does by traversing the pci_dn tree. The structure of the pci_dn tree
matches the bus tree on PowerNV which leads to the PE tree being "correct"
this setup method doesn't make a whole lot of sense and it's actively
confusing for the pseries case where it doesn't really do anything.
We want to remove the dependence on pci_dn anyway so this patch move
choosing where to insert a new PE into the platform code rather than
being part of the generic EEH code. For PowerNV this simplifies the
tree building logic and removes the use of pci_dn. For pseries we
keep the existing logic. I'm not really convinced it does anything
due to the 1-1 PE-to-PHB correspondence so every device under that
PHB should be in the same PE, but I'd rather not remove it entirely
until we've had a chance to look at it more deeply.
Signed-off-by: Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200725081231.39076-14-oohall@gmail.com
|