[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0CE8B6BE3C4AD74AB97D9D29BD24E5520147D5C2@CORPEXCH1.na.ads.idt.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 10:13:38 -0700
From: "Bounine, Alexandre" <Alexandre.Bounine@....com>
To: "Micha Nelissen" <micha@...i.hopto.org>
Cc: <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
"Matt Porter" <mporter@...nel.crashing.org>,
"Li Yang" <leoli@...escale.com>,
"Kumar Gala" <galak@...nel.crashing.org>,
"Thomas Moll" <thomas.moll@...go.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH -mm 0/2] RapidIO: Changes to handling of RIO switches
Micha Nelissen <micha@...i.hopto.org> wrote:
>
> Bounine, Alexandre wrote:
> > 1. The destid for the switch needs an additional mechanism to share
it
> > among processors in the RIO network,
>
> ? See comment for 2)
>
> > 2. It takes ID value away from the pool of available IDs, what will
>
> It does not take an ID away, it shares it with a connected endpoint to
> that switch. The tag uses one extra bit to identify the device as a
> switch instead of an endpoint. This provides the information to
> unambiguously identify a switch from an endpoint.
OK taking away #2. But do not see how it justifies storing two values of
destid.
And you have just confirmed using CT for unique identification. We
simply have differences in interpretation of CT: you are using component
tag to pass unique identification and I am using CT as a unique
identification. I prefer not to assume any relationship between routing
information and the component tag.
Alex.
--
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