Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 6 Apr 2010 11:09:14 -0700 | From | "Darrick J. Wong" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] calgary: Increase the maximum PHB bus number |
| |
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 09:18:05AM +0200, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote: > On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 10:37:50AM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 11:03:46AM +0200, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 04:59:01PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > > > > > -#define MAX_NUM_OF_PHBS 8 /* how many PHBs in total? */ > > > > -#define MAX_NUM_CHASSIS 8 /* max number of chassis */ > > > > -/* MAX_PHB_BUS_NUM is the maximal possible dev->bus->number */ > > > > -#define MAX_PHB_BUS_NUM (MAX_NUM_OF_PHBS * MAX_NUM_CHASSIS * 2) > > > > +/* > > > > + The maximum PHB bus number. > > > > + x3950M2 (rare): 8 chassis, 48 PHBs per chassis = 384 > > > > + x3950M2: 4 chassis, 48 PHBs per chassis = 192 > > > > + x3950 (PCIE): 8 chassis, 32 PHBs per chassis = 256 > > > > + x3950 (PCIX): 8 chassis, 16 PHBs per chassis = 128 > > > > +*/ > > > > +#define MAX_PHB_BUS_NUM 384 > > > > + > > > > #define PHBS_PER_CALGARY 4 > > > > > > We'll end up wasting a few bytes on small systems, but I don't think > > > it's enough to matter on these fairly large systems. As far as I'm > > > concerned, patch is fine. > > > > > > Acked-by: Muli Ben-Yehuda <muli@il.ibm.com> > > > > Hmm... has this patch been queued up by anyone for the .34 merge > > window? > > I don't maintain a separate Calgary patchset anymore, hopefully Ingo > or one of the other x86 maintainers have picked it up?
Still not in 2.6.34-rc3. Are there any objections to this patch? I've not heard any complaints since my original posting... or did it simply get lost in the noise?
--D
| |