On 01/18/2015 04:29 AM, Graeme Gregory wrote: > On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 02:46:35PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote: >> On 2015年01月18日 14:31, Jon Masters wrote: >>> Hi Folks, >>> >>> Sorry for top posting from bed. The mainstream servers will all likely do >>> PCIe but there are several that may not. They should not be excluded. That >> said, >>> if we booted a previously built kernel on a system without an MCFG and >>> got no ECAM/root then things would probably still work. >>> >>> I think it'll work out either way but for the record there is no requirement to do PCIe on ARM servers that conform to spec. >> >> OK, Catalin already said that was not the main point of the >> comments for this patch, I think the title and change log >> of the patch is inconsistent with the code makes Catalin confused, >> I will update them in next version. >> > Well what we are talking about is the presence of CONFIG_PCI=y which even > in Jons case will be true as he wants to run the same kernel on both > sets of hardware. Yup. And btw, the ACPI+PCI use case works beautifully already today. I will followup to my other Tested-by with a bit more detail later, but these patches have successfully been used on a wide range of PCIe based hardware already (I personally have tried a number of 10G network cards, SATA, USB, and even a graphics card or two for giggles). Jon. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
