<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Simon Horman wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:20091220012728.GD12578@verge.net.au" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 09:01:06PM +0800, Richard Liu wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Dear Simon:
Simon Horman wrote:
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!----></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">ARM is a highly custom platform, just reverse for other platform add
their code,
Some platforms might need PCI domains, but some platforms not.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Understood. Do you have any platforms in mind that wouldn't want
PCI domains? I was just thinking that perhaps PCI_DOMAINS could be added
later as needed, reducing noise in the code until the need arises.
But perhaps I'm reading the situation incorrectly.
</pre>
</blockquote>
Actually, most ARM platforms didn't need PCI domains. <br>
<br>
So, original patch is <br>
<pre wrap="">+config PCI_DOMAINS
<span class="moz-txt-citetags"></span>+ def_bool y
<span class="moz-txt-citetags"></span>+ depends on PCI && ARCH_CXXXXXX
<span class="moz-txt-citetags"></span>+<span class="moz-txt-citetags"></span>
</pre>
But I removed the "&& ARCH_CXXXXXXX" before I provided the
patch.<br>
Because ARCH_CXXXXXXX is not exist in ARM Linux kernel now (maybe it
would be committed at someday)<br>
<br>
I traced other ARM platforms, <br>
some platforms like Marvell Orion5x seems has both PCI and PCIe host
controller, <br>
Maybe they can use PCI domain to control their PCI/PCIe host
controller. <br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>