Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761744AbXKMU7v (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 15:59:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758868AbXKMU7m (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 15:59:42 -0500 Received: from palrel13.hp.com ([156.153.255.238]:49580 "EHLO palrel13.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757874AbXKMU7l (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 15:59:41 -0500 Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 13:59:39 -0700 From: Alex Chiang To: Linas Vepstas Cc: Greg KH , gregkh@suse.de, kristen.c.accardi@intel.com, lenb@kernel.org, matthew@wil.cx, rick.jones2@hp.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, pcihpd-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5][RFC] Physical PCI slot objects Message-ID: <20071113205939.GC22812@ldl.fc.hp.com> Mail-Followup-To: Alex Chiang , Linas Vepstas , Greg KH , gregkh@suse.de, kristen.c.accardi@intel.com, lenb@kernel.org, matthew@wil.cx, rick.jones2@hp.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, pcihpd-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org References: <20071113000853.GA13341@ldl.fc.hp.com> <20071113170129.GA20185@kroah.com> <20071113202424.GE8421@austin.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071113202424.GE8421@austin.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2431 Lines: 62 * Linas Vepstas : > On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 09:01:29AM -0800, Greg KH wrote: > > > > Also, some companies already provide userspace tools to get > > all of this information about the different slots in a system > > and what is where, from userspace, no kernel changes are > > needed. So, why add all this extra complexity to the kernel > > if it is not needed? > > Second that motion.... I don't get it. What are the goals of > this patch, really? Just to get a "slot geographical location" > from the kernel? Yes, plus some general cleanups in the PCI hotplug space (more patches queued up, pending the results of this series ;) But to use the word "just" kinda implies that this is a trivial feature that no one really cares about, which I'm not really sure I agree with. Slot geographical location is important for managability folks, who want to know which slot out of 192 (on a big HP ia64 system, e.g.) that their failing network card might be sitting in. And again, we (HP ia64) need to get this information from the kernel. > I'm balancing the intellectual appeal of having a kernel struct > for representing physical objects, against the headache of > reading (debugging, modifying) code that has yet another struct > doing yet another thing. So far, the dread of future headaches > is winning. Well, hopefully, the future is cleaner, rather than messier. ;) > On pseries systems, I deal with something called the > "partitionable endpoint", which I think probably usually > corresponds to physical slots, but I don't really know. > > So, naively, the physical slot concept doesn't really map to > what I have to work with; it just adds one more appendix to it > all, one more thing to get confused about. Sorry, I'm a bit ignorant about pseries -- what kind of name does your PCI hotplug driver give to those slots? What shows up in /sys/bus/pci/slots/? > To be clear: above remarks are for the PowerPC boxes. I have no > clue about how things work on the IBM Intel-based boxes. And > Greg's original "get IBM to agree" remark is about the > Intel-based boxes. A split house. I have no idea how Proliants work either. :) Thanks. /ac - 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/