Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 03:23:53PM -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote: >> I applied 1-9 to my linux-next branch; and at least patch #10 needs a respin, > > I still object to #2. We should have the flexibility to have 'struct > resource's that are not in this array in the pci_dev. I would like to > see the SR-IOV resources _not_ in this array (and indeed, I'd like to > see PCI bridges keep their producer resources somewhere other than in > this array). I accept that there are still some problems with this, but I understand your concern, and agree that using the array as resource manager is not the best way. But for now it's not possible as you know. We need a better resource manager for PCI subsystem to manage the various resources (traditional, device specific, bus related), which is another independent work from SR-IOV change. > patch #2 moves us further from being able to achieve this goal, not > closer. The array is obvious straightforward and can be easily replaced with a more advanced resource manager in the future. So I don't think we going further from or closer to the goal. Thanks, Yu _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
