Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759484AbZFXAEY (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jun 2009 20:04:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757104AbZFXAEP (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jun 2009 20:04:15 -0400 Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:57407 "EHLO gate.crashing.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753836AbZFXAEO (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jun 2009 20:04:14 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: remove pcibios_scan_all_fns() From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Cc: Matthew Wilcox , Alex Chiang , jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Kyle McMartin , Tony Luck , Russell King , Arnd Bergmann , Yoshinori Sato , Jeff Dike , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ralf Baechle , David Howells , Paul Mundt , Ivan Kokshaysky , Ingo Molnar , "David S. Miller" , Avi Kivity , Ian Campbell In-Reply-To: <4A415CDC.2090700@goop.org> References: <20090622140807.25509.54448.stgit@bob.kio> <20090622143431.GT19977@parisc-linux.org> <4A3FCB68.3030004@goop.org> <20090622183056.GY19977@parisc-linux.org> <1245714008.4017.7.camel@pasglop> <20090623190826.GJ19977@parisc-linux.org> <4A413C66.5010306@goop.org> <1245793758.10356.27.camel@pasglop> <4A41562F.1040901@goop.org> <1245796916.10356.40.camel@pasglop> <4A415CDC.2090700@goop.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 10:02:29 +1000 Message-Id: <1245801749.10356.46.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1686 Lines: 41 On Tue, 2009-06-23 at 15:53 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > On 06/23/09 15:41, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > >> Do you have any other cases in mind where it would be helpful? > >> > > > > Well, it might be for virtual device discovery etc... but don't bother > > now. We might talk about it at KS for those interested. It's more > > something we see as useful for embedded archs at the moment but in the > > long run it might make sense for hypervisors as well. > > > > Perhaps. We have Xenbus - which is a little bit like OF in that it has > data in a hierarchical namespace - and I guess it might be possible to > find a mapping onto some generic OF-like interface. Which is sort-of what we did. IE. We disconnected the device-tree itself from the underlying firmware, using the device-tree and OF-style bindings (in some case simplified) as a basis for representing devices but without the need for an actual open firmware underneath. > However, Xenbus is an active communication channel between virtual machines > rather than a > static representation of a machine configuration (for example, you can > put a watch on a particular path to get a notification of when someone > else changes it). On ppc64 too, the HV can feed us with new tree nodes or remove some, it doesn't have to be static. Though we mostly use it as a static tree on embedded. > But, yes, this is a good KS hallway track subject. Cheers, Ben. -- 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/