linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/8] PCI, ACPI, x86: Reserve fw allocated resource for hot-add root bus

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: <CAErSpo5vEb=63jGsqfau1G=f54oqq17pc3ZzcpzhL7hQrtYhng@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 9 Jan 2013 10:35:48 -0700
From:	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
To:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	Taku Izumi <izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com>,
	Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...wei.com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>,
	Koichi Yasutake <yasutake.koichi@...panasonic.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] PCI, ACPI, x86: Reserve fw allocated resource for
 hot-add root bus

On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com> wrote:
>>> I'm really sorry that it's taken me so long to get to these.
>>>
>>> I applied these to my pci/yinghai-survey-resources branch.  I
>>> re-ordered the last two and reworked some of the changelogs.
>>
>> To be clear about this, the pci/yinghai-survey-resources branch I
>> mentioned is a staging branch that just gets build test coverage.  I
>> don't plan to actually merge this or put it into -next until the
>> questions below are resolved.
>>
>> My inclination, until I'm persuaded otherwise, is to wait for patches
>> that preserve the similarities among these architectures.
>
> I don't know, that could be separated patcheset after we conclude
> pci root bus hotplug support.

The main reason I review patches before merging them is to identify
issues that we can fix before they affect everybody.  It makes my life
a lot easier if I don't have to keep track of pending unaddressed
review comments.  Is there an advantage to waiting and doing this work
later?

>>> In general these look good.  My main concern is that they only touch
>>> x86, without touching the similar code in frv, microblaze, mn10300,
>>> and powerpc.
>>>
>>> This code (pcibios_resource_survey(), pcibios_assign_resources(),
>>> pcibios_allocate_resources(), pcibios_allocate_bus_resources()) was
>>> obviously copied from x86 originally, and I'd like to preserve the
>>> similarity between them.  It would be even better to refactor it so
>>> it's actually *shared*, but I don't think that's a requirement right
>>> now.
>
> yes, should be moved to drivers/pci
>
>>>
>>> If we allow it to diverge now, it will make it harder to refactor and
>>> harder to notice when bug fixes should be applied to all of them.  For
>>> example, looking at pcibios_allocate_resources(), commit 575939cf5
>>> added some SR-IOV support to x86.  Should similar code be added for
>>> frv, microblaze, mn10300, and powerpc?
>
> should be treated the same.
>
>>>
>>> Anybody else have thoughts on this?
>>>
>>> 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/