dev: acpica: Add PCI device methods for aarch64

[sarah.walker2_arm.com]

Summary

Add pci_get_id() and pci_alloc_msi() device methods for aarch64 platforms.

Sponsored by: Arm Ltd

[sarah.walker2_arm.com]

Add missing prototypes

[sarah.walker2_arm.com]

Remove now-superfluous prototypes

[markj]

Seems fine to me. Rather than defining the methods only on arm64, can we instead only conditionalize the acpi_iort_* calls? Or is there some specific reason not to handle it that way?

sys/arm64/acpica/acpi_iort.c

842

Extra newline

[sarah.walker2_arm.com]

In D59169#1365873, @markj wrote:

Seems fine to me. Rather than defining the methods only on arm64, can we instead only conditionalize the acpi_iort_* calls? Or is there some specific reason not to handle it that way?

No, I can't think of a reason not to do that.

[sarah.walker2_arm.com]

Move aarch64 conditionals

[markj]

Looks ok, my comments are just style nits.

sys/arm64/acpica/acpi_iort.c

803

"_alloc_msi" would be more consistent with existing interfaces.

sys/dev/acpica/acpi.c

2385

Explicit comparison with 0 would be better style and clearer IMO.

[sarah.walker2_arm.com]

Address style feedback

[markj]

sys/arm64/acpica/acpi_iort.c

842

Still here.

sys/dev/acpica/acpi.c

2399

Same comment here about comparison with 0.

[sarah.walker2_arm.com]

Address review comments

[andrew]

sys/dev/acpica/acpi.c

161

Is this still needed (and around DEVMETHOD below)? It looks like it would break the build on non-arm64 as the functions will be unused.

[sarah.walker2_arm.com]

Remove unnecessary aarch64 guards