From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jesse Barnes Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] PCI mmconfig without ACPI Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 10:57:44 -0700 Message-ID: <20090505105744.4268e341@hobbes> References: <1233766786.16414.26.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090204181738.GA16174@elte.hu> <1234812741.28801.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from outbound-mail-135.bluehost.com ([67.222.39.25]:36700 "HELO outbound-mail-135.bluehost.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751810AbZEER5t (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 May 2009 13:57:49 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1234812741.28801.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Ed Swierk Cc: Ingo Molnar , tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lenb@kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 11:32:21 -0800 Ed Swierk wrote: > Here's another attempt at decoupling the setup of memory-mapped PCI > configuration space from ACPI. I implemented your suggestions for > moving the ACPI-specific code to a separate file. I left the > definition of struct acpi_mcfg_allocation alone, and created a new > struct pci_mcfg_allocation. The former is now used only for parsing > the actual ACPI MCFG table, while the latter is used to store > information about mmcfg regions regardless of where they came from. > > (This is still an RFC; the code is pretty much untested.) > I'm still a bit dubious about this; does it solve a real issue? Or just remove the ACPI dependency for its own sake? -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center