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:	Wed, 10 Sep 2008 15:48:04 +0800
From:	"Zhao, Yu" <yu.zhao@...el.com>
To:	"Roland Dreier" <rdreier@...co.com>, "Alex Chiang" <achiang@...com>
Cc:	"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

On Monday, September 01, 2008 11:50 PM, Roland Dreier wrote:
>To: Alex Chiang
>Cc: Zhao, Yu; Jesse Barnes; linux-pci@...r.kernel.org; Randy Dunlap; Greg KH;
>Grant Grundler; Matthew Wilcox; 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?

ARI is an independent PCI Express extended capability. Multi-function devices supporting this capability may use it to track dependency between different functions and assign function group numbers to these functions.

Another reason to keep this separated with SR-IOV is that after ARI is enabled, PCI Express Endpoint may have non-zero slot number (device number), which is different from traditional PCI Express Endpoint.

Thanks.

>
> - 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/