On Fri, 2017-03-24 at 17:13 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > I'd still prefer this to be a whitelist of the existing architectures using PCI > MMAP in procfs, there is really no reason for arm64 to be special, the > one thing we want to control here is whether new architectures (including > arm64) that have never had either the sysfs or the procfs interface > should get one or both of them. > > As it seems that there are important use cases for the sysfs interface > and your patch series will just make that work everywhere, I'd argue > that we should just always provide the sysfs interface now, and use > HAVE_PCI_MMAP only control the procfs interface. I still have no sympathy for the "we don't want <this> tiny part of the legacy generic non-architecture-specific procfs ABI to exist on ARM64". Why not just kill /proc/bus/pci *entirely* there? But sure, I suppose we could refactor things so that the sysfs mmap bits depend on (HAVE_PCI_MMAP || ARCH_GENERIC_MMAP_RESOURCE_RANGE) rather than having architectures define the latter in *addition* to the former. > That way, we turn on the sysfs interface on arc, arm64, frv and tile > as well as any future architecture with PCI support, but leave > the procfs support as opt-in. OK. My plan was for ARCH_GENERIC_MMAP_RESOURCE_RANGE to go away once all architectures were converted, and HAVE_PCI_MMAP to be all that's left. It does make send to do arc, fr-v and tile too though. So we can do it that way.
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
