Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753460AbYLRC05 (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Dec 2008 21:26:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751276AbYLRC0o (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Dec 2008 21:26:44 -0500 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:15247 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751169AbYLRC0n (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Dec 2008 21:26:43 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.36,241,1228118400"; d="scan'208";a="415425246" Message-ID: <4949B4E0.2010409@intel.com> Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 10:26:40 +0800 From: "Zhao, Yu" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Matthew Wilcox CC: Jesse Barnes , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" , "achiang@hp.com" , "bjorn.helgaas@hp.com" , "grundler@parisc-linux.org" , "greg@kroah.com" , "mingo@elte.hu" , "randy.dunlap@oracle.com" , "rdreier@cisco.com" , "horms@verge.net.au" , "yinghai@kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" , "virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/13 v7] PCI: Linux kernel SR-IOV support References: <20081121183605.GA7810@yzhao12-linux.sh.intel.com> <200812161523.55238.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> <20081217141542.GB19967@parisc-linux.org> In-Reply-To: <20081217141542.GB19967@parisc-linux.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 03:23:53PM -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote: >> I applied 1-9 to my linux-next branch; and at least patch #10 needs a respin, > > I still object to #2. We should have the flexibility to have 'struct > resource's that are not in this array in the pci_dev. I would like to > see the SR-IOV resources _not_ in this array (and indeed, I'd like to > see PCI bridges keep their producer resources somewhere other than in > this array). I accept that there are still some problems with this, but I understand your concern, and agree that using the array as resource manager is not the best way. But for now it's not possible as you know. We need a better resource manager for PCI subsystem to manage the various resources (traditional, device specific, bus related), which is another independent work from SR-IOV change. > patch #2 moves us further from being able to achieve this goal, not > closer. The array is obvious straightforward and can be easily replaced with a more advanced resource manager in the future. So I don't think we going further from or closer to the goal. Thanks, Yu -- 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/