From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-yw0-x22d.google.com (mail-yw0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90FDD21A16ED1 for ; Tue, 30 May 2017 09:48:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yw0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id b68so42668287ywe.3 for ; Tue, 30 May 2017 09:49:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=broadcom.com; s=google; h=from:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:thread-index:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=PdJ0AU+vPk9y/o0VSOR6sXd3a2RZ79rswVC44unEwck=; b=dWOWCCCdPrekUsPJW/CD/BMP64Q7qAVgn+HVlFKeFnNtXNX759/IjT5p2NT+zn63gg SvJfUg0lrjPeG4jLeKl5oKPKZe8E6ljarMUXIhosHNk+cdKbtew1a/2Dd3SmZ8ndk2BA XFKRxw16cQOlhU01A4GRBu8wTOlsMwEIu2P0M= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :thread-index:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=PdJ0AU+vPk9y/o0VSOR6sXd3a2RZ79rswVC44unEwck=; b=IE2pycBDxReuR/bFNWrglWQ6nqinUM/jpPW67RcgH0/C1/gMvc7vkEINLhCygtBMXr 4XBDinLOKv1jwEI+yLJMguDlnvxb199NlJD8mN4C2z6BhLmq0JqVh0xV62qv0/x2NWWH 3jPwSNdtImQYbUnq0yFlxZU/QaOtOMdp/wuw9YPSqqcuj1k4MN2q3AAjehLQ8jRr10sb jWyCo8dO0ib9N5EzwzC6iPmJQSssrVtSFzSNi6v83JiHR1lQ/EHRpy+vyqfo7uZkPX4y EjSVhBgiIqrfcWiE5FicqnoovgxuwXlq90ISD/B78PKUgZAHZ1Tpw3rUw+SZCOtjaOp9 3ceQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcB35W4gIsfqaGp4MqENLOVNyXN3aXn6RaflpidD9Y6ElKfyV/0q n/u1I6/JkQMiCkhU5eKHVrypMyKPLmcf X-Received: by 10.13.196.134 with SMTP id g128mr15844799ywd.277.1496162957958; Tue, 30 May 2017 09:49:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Vladimir Olovyannikov References: <4220315aed43c05b37b1b71a9eff432e@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQGJgBaRYALxe2tiJNyoWDxrDGFkmQGx0LmjopI5lRA= Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 09:49:16 -0700 Message-ID: <730d8b33c76d52366585fd6055562d88@mail.gmail.com> To: Ard Biesheuvel Cc: edk2-devel@lists.01.org Subject: Re: Using a generic PciHostBridgeDxe driver for a multi-PCIe-domain platform X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 16:48:19 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > -----Original Message----- > From: Ard Biesheuvel [mailto:ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org] > Sent: May-30-17 9:35 AM > To: Vladimir Olovyannikov > Cc: edk2-devel@lists.01.org > Subject: Re: Using a generic PciHostBridgeDxe driver for a > multi-PCIe-domain > platform > > On 30 May 2017 at 16:23, Vladimir Olovyannikov > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I've started PCIe stack implementation design for an armv8 aarch64 > > platform. > > The platform's PCIe represents several host bridges, and each > > hostbridge has one rootbridge. > > They do not share any resources between each other. > > Looking into the PciHostBridgeDxe implementation I can see that it > > supports only one hostbridge, and there is a comment: > > // Most systems in the world including complex servers have only one > > Host Bridge. > > > > So in my case should I create my own PciHostBridgeDxe driver > > supporting multiple hostbridges and do not use the Industry standard > driver? > > I am very new to it, and will appreciate any help or idea. > > > > As far as I can tell, PciHostBridgeLib allows you to return an arbitrary > number > of PCI host bridges, each with their own segment number. I haven't tried > it > myself, but it is worth a try whether returning an array of all host > bridges on > your platform works as expected. Thank you Ard, Right, but PciHostBridgeDxe seems to work with one hostbridge. I am confused that // Make sure all root bridges share the same ResourceAssigned value The rootbridges are independent on the platform, and should not share anything. Or am I missing anything? Anyway, I will try to return multiple hostbridges in the PciHostBridgeLib. Thank you, Vladimir