[U-Boot] [RFC] drivers: pci: imx: add imx_pcie_remove function

[Tim Harvey]

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 6:18 AM, Stefano Babic <sbabic at denx.de> wrote:
> Hi Fabio,
>
> On 11/05/2017 13:06, Fabio Estevam wrote:
>> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 6:01 AM, Peter Senna Tschudin
>> <peter.senna at collabora.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you for working on this! Your patch worked for me, but I needed to
>>> add an "extern void imx_pcie_remove(void);" before calling the function,
>>> which probably means I'm missing something.
>>
>> The extern should be added into a header file.
>>
>>> After applying this patch to u-boot, u-boot can initialize PCI and
>>> 4.11.0-next-20170510 will boot. Without your patch 4.11.0-next-20170510
>>> do not boot if u-boot initialize the PCI bus.
>>>
>>> Thanks a lot!
>>>
>>> Here is the patch I'm using for our board:
>>
>> Stefano,
>>
>> The patches that Tim/Peter posted solve a kernel hang with kernel 4.11
>> on mx6q when U-Boot has PCI support.
>>
>> Could you please take a look and let us know if there is a more
>> generic way to fix this issue, like fixing it for all mx6qdl boards
>> that have PCI support?
>>
>> I understand that ideally the imx6 pci driver should be converted to
>> driver model and then we add the .remove hook, like Lucas did for
>> Barebox:
>> https://git.pengutronix.de/cgit/barebox/commit/?id=f1da98da2760c21487bbba8f7fb957c843a22896
>>
>> While the imx pci driver is not converted to device model, would you
>> be willing to accept such per board patches for the time being?
>>
>> Please advise.
>
>
> Ok - let wait for Tim's answer, if he has enough time to work on this to
> move to DM. If not, it will be ok for now to fix it in this way, hoping
> to move soon to DM.
>
> Regards,
> Stefano

Stefano,

I don't have enough time to work on the DM conversion currently but it
sounds like this would be a welcomed 'fix' that we should get in
sooner than later.

I know the include is missing from a header but I didn't bother as I
though there would be a better arch-specific place to put the call to
the remove. I don't think putting it in ft_board_setup made sense. Do
you have any suggestions where it should go?

Tim