Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 14 Jul 2003 10:38:13 -0700 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] /proc/bus/pci* changes |
| |
On Mon, Jul 14, 2003 at 01:40:01AM -0400, Albert Cahalan wrote: > > The directory structure may well be finished, > at least until it is time to remove the old > interfaces. (in a few years I guess) > > What's missing is the ability to pass cache-control > info through the mmap() interface. This is useful > for non-PCI purposes as well. Some thought will be > required, as there is a set of commonly useful > settings among all the arch-specific features.
Why would userspace want to do this? Any examples?
> > And are you prepared to patch all of > > the userspace programs that currently rely on the existing interface > > (like XFree86 for one)? > > The existing interface STILL WORKS. Apps can > transition over time, in part or in whole. > ("in part" meaning to use the old hacks on > the new pathname, gaining PCI domain support) > > It's important to get the new interface in > ASAP, so that all the obscure (in-house, etc.) > user-space drivers can start to transition. > The X server is less of a worry, because it > is a very active project. > > > Also, I don't think you are handling the pci domain space in your patch, > > or am I just missing it? > > You missed it: third paragraph, first email > > Example: > You have two devices with the same bus > number (5), device number (4), and function > number (2). One is in domain 0, and the > other is in domain 42. You get: > > pci0/bus5/dev4/fn2/config-space > pci42/bus5/dev4/fn2/config-space > > Depending on what pci_name_bus does with > the conflict, you'll get one or two symlinks > from the old name(s). You'll also get some > correctly-sized files to represent the > resources. For example: > > pci0/bus5/dev4/fn2/bar0 > pci0/bus5/dev4/fn2/bar1 > pci0/bus5/dev4/fn2/bar2 > pci42/bus5/dev4/fn2/bar0
Any reason for not using the same sysfs naming scheme to keep things universal?
> Here's an attachment:
Which can't be quoted :(
Anyway, I really don't like the huge array you are declaring if we have pci domains. And I really don't want to apply this until someone shows me a real use for it. Maybe we should add mmap functions to sysfs? :)
thanks,
greg k-h - 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/
| |