linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/6] Add multi mport support.

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]

Message-Id: <F2D2FCC7-D1ED-4DC6-BE7A-EE2755CCE125@kernel.crashing.org>
Date:	Thu, 31 Jan 2008 00:20:41 -0600
From:	Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org>
To:	Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org>
Cc:	Zhang Wei <wei.zhang@...escale.com>, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] Add multi mport support.


On Jan 31, 2008, at 12:15 AM, Kumar Gala wrote:

>
> On Jan 30, 2008, at 11:57 PM, Zhang Wei wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Kumar Gala [mailto:galak@...nel.crashing.org]
>>>
>>> On Jan 30, 2008, at 4:30 AM, Zhang Wei wrote:
>>>
>>>> Change lots of static variable to mport private. And add
>>> mport to some
>>>> function declaration.
>>>
>>> Can you explain this patch further.  Its not clear exactly from this
>>> commit message why we are doing this.
>>>
>>> - k
>>
>> Sorry about I have a little hurry about it.
>>
>> The original RapidIO driver suppose there is only one mpc85xx RIO
>> controller
>> in system. So, some data structures are defined as mpc85xx_rio  
>> global,
>> such as 'regs_win', 'dbell_ring', 'msg_tx_ring'. Now, I changed them
>> to
>> mport's private members. And you can define multi RIO OF-nodes in dts
>> file
>> for multi RapidIO controller in one processor, such as PCI/PCI-Ex  
>> host
>> controllers
>> in Freescale's silicon. And the mport operation function declaration
>> should be changed
>> to know which RapidIO controller is target.
>
> thanks, this makes a lot of sense and now reviewing the patch will
> make some sense to me :)

when we have multiple ports are the device IDs on the ports intended  
to be unique only to a port or unique across all ports?

- k
--
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/