Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760003AbZJNUu5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Oct 2009 16:50:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757133AbZJNUu4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Oct 2009 16:50:56 -0400 Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com ([171.71.176.117]:65178 "EHLO sj-iport-6.cisco.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752991AbZJNUuz (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Oct 2009 16:50:55 -0400 Authentication-Results: sj-iport-6.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEANDW1UqrR7H+/2dsb2JhbADCAZhkhC4E X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.44,561,1249257600"; d="scan'208";a="409409157" From: Roland Dreier To: ddutile@redhat.com Cc: Krzysztof Halasa , Stefan Assmann , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Jesse Barnes , kaneshige.kenji@jp.fujitsu.com, matthew@wil.cx Subject: Re: GT/s vs Gbps for PCIe bus speed References: <4AD58EEE.4070405@redhat.com> <4AD62B52.9060200@redhat.com> X-Message-Flag: Warning: May contain useful information Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 13:50:17 -0700 In-Reply-To: <4AD62B52.9060200@redhat.com> (Don Dutile's message of "Wed, 14 Oct 2009 15:49:38 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.91 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Oct 2009 20:50:18.0967 (UTC) FILETIME=[F095AE70:01CA4D0F] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1017 Lines: 24 FWIW, I think using the same nomenclature as the PCI-SIG documents is probably the least confusing option. Inventing our own terminology that conflicts with the "upstream" PCI specs is just going to confuse things, even if the Linux terminology is "better." With that said: > "66 MHz PCIX 533", /* 0x11 */ > "100 MHz PCIX 533", /* 0x12 */ > "133 MHz PCIX 533", /* 0x13 */ > "2.5 GT/s PCI-E", /* 0x14 */ > "5.0 GT/s PCI-E", /* 0x15 */ it is the case that PCI-SIG uses "PCI-X" and "PCIe" rather than "PCIX" and "PCI-E". That naming would make sense to me as something to clean up. The table of names also seems to be missing entries for PCI-X mode 1 with ECC, although I don't know if there ever was a system with a device that actually used that mode. - R. -- 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/