diff mbox

[U-Boot,2/8] dm: pci: Allow skipping device configuration

Message ID 1441014773-10902-3-git-send-email-bmeng.cn@gmail.com
State Superseded
Delegated to: Simon Glass
Headers show

Commit Message

Bin Meng Aug. 31, 2015, 9:52 a.m. UTC
The non-dm pci driver can skip specified device configuration. With
dm conversion, this capability is lost. Add this back for dm pci.

Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>
---

 drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

Comments

Simon Glass Aug. 31, 2015, 1:21 p.m. UTC | #1
Hi Bin,

On 31 August 2015 at 03:52, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com> wrote:
> The non-dm pci driver can skip specified device configuration. With
> dm conversion, this capability is lost. Add this back for dm pci.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>
> ---
>
>  drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

I really am not keen on these callback functions and would like to
avoid them for driver model. Can we check a device tree property
instead?

Regards,
Simon
Bin Meng Aug. 31, 2015, 2:24 p.m. UTC | #2
Hi Simon,

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 9:21 PM, Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> wrote:
> Hi Bin,
>
> On 31 August 2015 at 03:52, Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The non-dm pci driver can skip specified device configuration. With
>> dm conversion, this capability is lost. Add this back for dm pci.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>
>>  drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c | 3 +++
>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> I really am not keen on these callback functions and would like to
> avoid them for driver model. Can we check a device tree property
> instead?
>

Yes, I think so. Will try in v2.

Regards,
Bin
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c b/drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c
index b25298f..0e64244 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c
@@ -562,6 +562,9 @@  int pci_bind_bus_devices(struct udevice *bus)
 		struct udevice *dev;
 		ulong class;
 
+		if (pci_skip_dev(bus->uclass_priv, bdf))
+			continue;
+
 		if (PCI_FUNC(bdf) && !found_multi)
 			continue;
 		/* Check only the first access, we don't expect problems */