[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CADnq5_NOm8DkHWCw-s9B4+n=9qezS8kg9TXDK0fz9nP1vFB+mw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 16:28:57 -0500
From: Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@...il.com>
To: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
Cc: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@....com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Maling list - DRI developers
<dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>,
Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Christian Koenig <christian.koenig@....com>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] pci/p2p: add a function to test peer to peer capability
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 3:25 PM Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2019-01-29 12:56 p.m., Alex Deucher wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 12:47 PM <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.
> >>
> >
> > What about something like these patches:
> > https://cgit.freedesktop.org/~deathsimple/linux/commit/?h=p2p&id=4fab9ff69cb968183f717551441b475fabce6c1c
> > https://cgit.freedesktop.org/~deathsimple/linux/commit/?h=p2p&id=f90b12d41c277335d08c9dab62433f27c0fadbe5
> > They are a bit more thorough.
>
> Those new functions seem to have a lot of overlap with the code that is
> already upstream in p2pdma.... Perhaps you should be improving the
> p2pdma functions if they aren't suitable for what you want already
> instead of creating new ones.
Could be. Those patches are pretty old. They probably need to be
rebased on the latest upstream p2p stuff.
Alex
Powered by blists - more mailing lists