Re: [PATCH v2 08/16] ppc/pnv: user created pnv-phb for powernv9

[Frederic Barrat]

On 07/06/2022 08:35, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> > > Also, the comment seems wrong to me. The qom parenting doesn't matter 
> > > when building the device tree. 
>
> it does. See pnv_dt_xscom()


Yeah, what I meant is that on P9, there's no "dt_scom" method for the 
PHB. The PHBs are added by the dt_scom() of the PEC. So the parenting of 
the PHB doesn't really matter.

I was actually wondering why it was done that way. If we have a clean 
qom tree (again, only on P9/P10 because P8 is wrong), then the PEC could 
add the "pbcq@xxxxxx" layer in the device tree, then call the qom 
children, i.e. the PHBs, and they would each add themselves (each phb 
adds the 'stack@xxxxxx' entry in the device tree).

But then I see your comment about giving headaches for user-created 
devices. So something else to discuss...

  Fred