[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071113203645.GB22812@ldl.fc.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 13:36:45 -0700
From: Alex Chiang <achiang@...com>
To: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>, gregkh@...e.de,
kristen.c.accardi@...el.com, lenb@...nel.org, rick.jones2@...com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz,
pcihpd-discuss@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5][RFC] Physical PCI slot objects
* Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>:
>
> Ok, again, I want to see the IBM people sign off on this, after
> testing on all of their machines, before I'll consider this, as
> I know the IBM acpi tables are "odd".
Who would be a good contact at IBM to get some eyes / machine
time on this?
> Also, how about Dell machines? I know they are probably not
> expecting this information to show up and who knows if the
> numbering of their slots match up with their physical diagrams
Who would be a good contact at Dell for the same?
I don't have as much experience with oddball firmware from
various vendors as others on this list, but given the rather
stable definition of _SUN in the ACPI spec, I'd be surprised to
see vendors abusing that method. [I fully accept the possibility
that I'm just naive ;)]
More likely, a vendor will do what the HP Proliant folks did,
that being simply omitting a _SUN method altogether.
One more thought on that -- at *worst* my patch series will do no
worse than the status quo of what the acpiphp module is doing
today. That module walks through the namespace looking for _SUN
methods, and when it finds them, it creates an entry in exactly
the same spot (/sys/bus/pci/slots/N) that my patch series does.
What this series adds beyond acpiphp is adding entries for slots
that aren't hotpluggable.
> IBM sells a program that does this for server rooms. It's
> probably part of some Tivoli package somewhere, sorry I don't
> remember the name. I did see it working many years ago and it
> required no kernel changes at all to work properly.
Like I said in an earlier email, HP ia64 systems will require a
kernel change to get this information. Whether it comes via a
generic ACPI access layer like dev_acpi, or something like this
patch series, the kernel will still get touched.
Thanks.
/ac
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists