Hi Mathias,
On 2016/7/25 14:05, Koehrer Mathias (ETAS/ESW5) wrote:
Hi Gavin,
Mathias, The code change would conflict with Yongji's patch where the
wildcard introduced to identify PCI devices.
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/642473/
That's true, however it is also true the other way round. The first sending of my patch was
22-June 2016 and thus before Yongji's patch...
See also the comment of Bjorn Helgaas on my patch (v1):
http://marc.info/?l=linux-pci&m=146654644431550&w=2
However it looks as if there are a couple of (conflicting) approaches for the issue with the alignment of PCI addresses flying around...
My personal opinion is that the need to adapt the alignment of PCI addresses should be done on PCI device/vendor ids of relevant PCI devices and not on PCI addresses.
The PCI addresses are likely to change e.g. by inserting another PCI board. The device/vendor id of the devices will not change.
Yes, your opinion is right. I think I will update my patches based on
your change.
With your patch, seems like we can specify alignment for all PCI devices
by using something like: pci=resource_alignment=4096@pci:0:0.
We'd better document it.
Thanks,
Yongji
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
