On 06/03/2016 08:32 AM, Gabriele Paoloni wrote:
[...]
+struct pci_ecam_ops *pci_mcfg_get_ops(struct acpi_pci_root *root)
+{
+ int bus_num = root->secondary.start;
+ int domain = root->segment;
+ struct pci_cfg_fixup *f;
+
+ if (!mcfg_table)
+ return &pci_generic_ecam_ops;
+
+ /*
+ * Match against platform specific quirks and return
corresponding
+ * CAM ops.
+ *
+ * First match against PCI topology <domain:bus> then use OEM ID
and
+ * OEM revision from MCFG table standard header.
+ */
+ for (f = __start_acpi_mcfg_fixups; f < __end_acpi_mcfg_fixups;
f++) {
+ if ((f->domain == domain || f->domain ==
PCI_MCFG_DOMAIN_ANY) &&
+ (f->bus_num == bus_num || f->bus_num ==
PCI_MCFG_BUS_ANY) &&
+ (!strncmp(f->oem_id, mcfg_table->header.oem_id,
+ ACPI_OEM_ID_SIZE)) &&
+ (f->oem_revision == mcfg_table->header.oem_revision))
Is this more likely to be updated between quirky and fixed platforms
than oem_table_id? What do folks think about using oem_table_id instead
of, or in addition to, oem_revision?
From my understanding we need to stick to this mechanism as (otherwise)
there are platforms out in the field that would need a FW update.
So I don't think that using oem_table_id "instead" is possible; about
"in addition" I think it is doable, but I do not see the advantage much.
I mean that if a platform gets fixed the oem revision should change too,
Right?
I think you are correct. My take away on discussions about using this
style of quirk matching was that we would require the oem_revision to
change as different quirks (or lack of quirks) were required.
David Daney
Thanks
Gab
