Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 03:23:53PM -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote:
I applied 1-9 to my linux-next branch; and at least patch #10 needs a respin,
I still object to #2. We should have the flexibility to have 'struct
resource's that are not in this array in the pci_dev. I would like to
see the SR-IOV resources _not_ in this array (and indeed, I'd like to
see PCI bridges keep their producer resources somewhere other than in
this array). I accept that there are still some problems with this, but
I understand your concern, and agree that using the array as resource
manager is not the best way. But for now it's not possible as you know.
We need a better resource manager for PCI subsystem to manage the
various resources (traditional, device specific, bus related), which is
another independent work from SR-IOV change.
patch #2 moves us further from being able to achieve this goal, not
closer.
The array is obvious straightforward and can be easily replaced with a
more advanced resource manager in the future. So I don't think we going
further from or closer to the goal.
Thanks,
Yu
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
