Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:35:27 -0700 (PDT) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: [RFC&PATCH 1/2] PCI Error Recovery (readX_check) |
| |
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > Yup, but then, the user have to take care that behind a single "error > checking" entity (a bridge for example), all devices have such drivers > that honor the bridge-level locking and not their own.
Yes. I suspect that this all matters in places where you have pretty strict hardware controls anyway, so it's likely not a big deal.
> On ppc64, I think we always have 1 bridge = 1 slot though, makes things > easier (well, provided we don't start to try playing with error coming > from slots on the g5).
Yes, I'd assume that most high-end hardware (ie the kind that people have who care about these things in the first place) wants to minimize the number of shared error reporting bridges anyway.
Linus - 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/
| |