[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <98d345af-7928-2a50-7bc4-582916dfac80@deltatee.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 11:26:01 -0700
From: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
To: jglisse@...hat.com, linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Christian Koenig <christian.koenig@....com>,
Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@....com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>,
iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] drivers/base: add a function to test peer to peer
capability
On 2019-01-29 10:47 a.m., jglisse@...hat.com wrote:
> From: Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>
>
> device_test_p2p() return true if two devices can peer to peer to
> each other. We add a generic function as different inter-connect
> can support peer to peer and we want to genericaly test this no
> matter what the inter-connect might be. However this version only
> support PCIE for now.
This doesn't appear to be used in any of the further patches; so it's
very confusing.
I'm not sure a struct device wrapper is really necessary...
Logan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists