Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 4 Jun 2007 15:06:54 -0400 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 5/15] x86-64: Calgary - abstract how we find the iommu_table for a device |
| |
On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 11:33:44AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 22 May 2007 04:05:54 -0400 > muli@il.ibm.com wrote: > > > From: Muli Ben-Yehuda <muli@il.ibm.com> > > > > ... in preparation for doing it differently for CalIOC2. > > > > This patch gets > > patching file arch/x86_64/kernel/pci-calgary.c > Hunk #2 FAILED at 374. > Hunk #3 FAILED at 403. > Hunk #4 FAILED at 457. > Hunk #5 FAILED at 473. > Hunk #6 FAILED at 489. > 5 out of 6 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file arch/x86_64/kernel/pci-calgary.c.rej > Failed to apply x86-64-calgary-abstract-how-we-find-the-iommu_table-for-a-device > > > due to git-pciseg.patch. > > So I'll drop git-pciseg until this patch gets to mainline and then > git-pciseg gets fixed up for it.
Regardless of who it is, people have to stop fighting over ->sysdata. It's unscalable, regardless of who it is.
Whoever wants to be upstream first should take the basic "x86 sysdata" bits from jgarzik/misc-2.6.git#pciseg and push those upstream... which I note includes Calgary work.
Then NUMA, Calgary and PCI domain stuff merely involve modifying the x86 version of struct pci_sysdata.
I would NAK any [PCI domain | NUMA | Calgary]-only approach to using ->sysdata. It clearly does NOT belong to any one subsystem, regardless of who gets upstream first.
Drop git-pciseg? sure. Make sysdata Calgary-specific? NAK.
Jeff
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |