[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ada3akjj268.fsf@cisco.com>
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists