[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <000201d2eba8$dade4ac0$909ae040$@dell.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 18:42:38 -0400
From: "Allen Hubbe" <Allen.Hubbe@...l.com>
To: "'Logan Gunthorpe'" <logang@...tatee.com>,
"'Jon Mason'" <jdmason@...zu.us>
Cc: <linux-ntb@...glegroups.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"'Dave Jiang'" <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
"'Serge Semin'" <fancer.lancer@...il.com>,
"'Kurt Schwemmer'" <kurt.schwemmer@...rosemi.com>,
"'Stephen Bates'" <sbates@...thlin.com>,
"'Greg Kroah-Hartman'" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: RE: New NTB API Issue
From: Logan Gunthorpe
> Any thoughts on changing the semantics of mw_get_align so it must be
> called with the link up?
The intention of these is that these calls return information from the local port. The calls themselves don't reach across the link to the peer, but the information returned from the local port needs to be communicated for setting up the translation end-to-end.
I would like to understand why this hardware needs link up. Are there registers on the local port that are only valid after link up?
Can you post snippets of how ntb_mw_get_align and ntb_peer_mw_get_addr might be implemented for the Switchtec?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists