linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4 v2] PCI: support ARI capability

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 01 Sep 2008 08:50:23 -0700
From:	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
To:	Alex Chiang <achiang@...com>
Cc:	"Zhao\, Yu" <yu.zhao@...el.com>,
	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
	linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	Grant Grundler <grundler@...isc-linux.org>,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kvm@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4 v2] PCI: support ARI capability

 > > +config PCI_ARI
 > > +	bool "PCI ARI support"
 > > +	depends on PCI
 > > +	default n
 > > +	help
 > > +	  This enables PCI Alternative Routing-ID Interpretation.
 > 
 > This Kconfig help text is a little weak. Why not include the text
 > you've already written here:
 > 
 > 	Support Alternative Routing-ID Interpretation (ARI), which
 > 	increases the number of functions that can be supported by a PCIe
 > 	endpoint. ARI is required by SR-IOV.

I agree with this improvement to the help text.  But a further question
is whether ARI even merits its own user-visible config option.  Is it
worth having yet another choice for users?  When would someone want ARI
but not SR-IOV?

 - R.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/