[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAErSpo7-BEiBWBYNdEdx_UhqYaMkqvaMck5uYCivVDVYX+qPuQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 10:59:44 -0600
From: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Adam Jackson <ajax@...hat.com>,
Lucas Kannebley Tavares <lucaskt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@....ibm.com>,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Brian King <brking@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: radeon: RFC speed cap detection on ppc64
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 9:44 AM, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
>> That (walking all parent nodes) is probably the safest thing to do. I'm
>> not sure whether it's optimal. It would likely depend on whether you
>> can meaningfully have a bridge that's faster on the downstream side than
>> on the upstream.
>
> This is architecture goo at heart - would this be better as a helper in
> the PCI and arch PCI code ?
Good point.
POWER is not the only architecture where host bridges do not appear as
devices in PCI config space -- ia64 has that, too. So the comment is
too specific.
The link is a point-to-point thing, so this should be a local
negotiation between the radeon device and the upstream bridge. I
don't see the point of walking any farther up the chain.
drm_pcie_get_speed_cap_mask() should also be changed to use
pcie_capability_read_dword() to avoid any issues with v1/v2 PCI
Express Capability structures.
Bjorn
--
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