* Altix I/O code reorganization
@ 2004-08-04 20:14 Pat Gefre
2004-08-05 0:31 ` Grant Grundler
` (5 more replies)
0 siblings, 6 replies; 36+ messages in thread
From: Pat Gefre @ 2004-08-04 20:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-ia64; +Cc: linux-kernel
We have reorganized the I/O layer in the Altix code.
We are posting this code for review before submitting for inclusion in
the 2.5 tree.
The patch set is at: ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/sn2/sn2-update/
It is based off the http://lia64.bkbits.net/to-linus-2.5 tree
The general changes are:
o added new hardware support
o code cleanup (typedefs, include files, etc.)
o simplified the directory structure (all files were arch/ia64/sn/io/
are now under arch/ia64/sn/ioif/)
o code size reduced by >50%
o major reorg of the code itself
o copyright updates
The patches and a short comment for each:
001-deleted-files
# contains all the files that are no longer needed
002-pci-fixup
# The io_init.c file replaces the pci_bus_cvlink.c. A diff of the files
# would not make much sense as the functionalities provided in pci_bus_cvlink.c
# are no longer needed. The new functions needed are:
#
# 1. Getting Platform Specific Information for PCI Buses/Devices.
# 2. Getting Hardware Workaround Information.
# 3. Getting I/O Hub Information.
#
# The io_init.c file basically contains all the routines that are needed to
# allow a PCI Device Driver to perform Interrupts, PIOs and DMAs.
003-pci-support
# There are some minor changes in these files. The biggest change is that we have
# broken up the SN Platform Specific DMA mapping interfaces into 3 different
# routines:
#
# 1. 32Bit Direct Mapping.
# 2. 32Bit PMU Mapping.
# 3. 64Bit Direct Mapping.
#
# The SN Platform has 3 different PCI/PCIX Bridges. They are not all exactly the
# same, however they do provide the same functionality. We have abstracted
# the DMA mapping calls so that the caller will not have to be aware of the
# hardware differences. Example:
#
# *dma_handle = (*provider->dmatrans_direct64)(pcidev_info, phys_addr,
# PCIIO_DMA_CMD | PCIIO_DMA_A64);
#
# The Bus Driver for this card, determines the appropriate method.
#
004-pci-bridge-drivers
# This set of new files supports 2 of our 3 PCI Bridges, PIC and TIOCP.
# pcibr_dma.c is new and provides the PCI DMA Mapping routines.
# pcibr_sal_interfaces.c is new and provides the SAL Interfaces.
# pcibr_provider.c is new and defines the Chipset specific Provider Tables.
#
# The rest of the file changes are mostly cleanup.
005-klconfig
# Moved a file, but mostly cleanup
006-bte
# Changes needed to remove hwgraph
007-io-hub-provider
# Files needed to provide services for our I/O Hub devices
008-kdb-support-functions
# KDB support functions
009-misc-sources
# code cleanup
# ran thru Lindent
# changes needed for new I/O structure
010-new-includes
# New includes with definitions for PCI devices, buses, and I/O hubs
011-misc-include-changes
# code cleanup
# misc changes needed for new I/O structure
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread* Re: Altix I/O code reorganization 2004-08-04 20:14 Altix I/O code reorganization Pat Gefre @ 2004-08-05 0:31 ` Grant Grundler 2004-08-05 18:16 ` Greg KH ` (4 subsequent siblings) 5 siblings, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Grant Grundler @ 2004-08-05 0:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Pat Gefre; +Cc: linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 03:14:08PM -0500, Pat Gefre wrote: > We are posting this code for review before submitting for inclusion in > the 2.5 tree. I'm sure you really meant 2.6. > The patch set is at: ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/sn2/sn2-update/ > > It is based off the http://lia64.bkbits.net/to-linus-2.5 tree I was previously told to not use that tree. It's only for linus to pull a subset of patches from. Tony, is "http://lia64.bkbits.net:8080/linux-ia64-2.56" the right tree to use? hth, grant ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Altix I/O code reorganization 2004-08-04 20:14 Altix I/O code reorganization Pat Gefre 2004-08-05 0:31 ` Grant Grundler @ 2004-08-05 18:16 ` Greg KH 2004-08-05 20:51 ` Pat Gefre ` (3 subsequent siblings) 5 siblings, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Greg KH @ 2004-08-05 18:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Pat Gefre; +Cc: linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 03:14:08PM -0500, Pat Gefre wrote: > > The patches and a short comment for each: Care to post the patches here so that we can comment on them? greg k-h ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Altix I/O code reorganization 2004-08-04 20:14 Altix I/O code reorganization Pat Gefre 2004-08-05 0:31 ` Grant Grundler 2004-08-05 18:16 ` Greg KH @ 2004-08-05 20:51 ` Pat Gefre 2004-08-05 21:08 ` Greg KH 2004-08-06 13:18 ` Christoph Hellwig ` (2 subsequent siblings) 5 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Pat Gefre @ 2004-08-05 20:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg KH; +Cc: Pat Gefre, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Greg KH wrote: + On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 03:14:08PM -0500, Pat Gefre wrote: + > + > The patches and a short comment for each: + + Care to post the patches here so that we can comment on them? + + greg k-h + I thought I put the url where the patches are. You should be able to see them here: ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/sn2/sn2-update/ -- Pat ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Altix I/O code reorganization 2004-08-05 20:51 ` Pat Gefre @ 2004-08-05 21:08 ` Greg KH 2004-08-05 21:32 ` Jesse Barnes 0 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Greg KH @ 2004-08-05 21:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Pat Gefre; +Cc: linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 03:51:46PM -0500, Pat Gefre wrote: > On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Greg KH wrote: > > + On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 03:14:08PM -0500, Pat Gefre wrote: > + > > + > The patches and a short comment for each: > + > + Care to post the patches here so that we can comment on them? > + > + greg k-h > + > > I thought I put the url where the patches are. You did. You must not have read what Documentation/SubmittingPatches says to do... greg k-h ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Altix I/O code reorganization 2004-08-05 21:08 ` Greg KH @ 2004-08-05 21:32 ` Jesse Barnes 2004-08-05 21:36 ` Greg KH 0 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Jesse Barnes @ 2004-08-05 21:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg KH; +Cc: Pat Gefre, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Thursday, August 5, 2004 2:08 pm, Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 03:51:46PM -0500, Pat Gefre wrote: > > On Thu, 5 Aug 2004, Greg KH wrote: > > > > + On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 03:14:08PM -0500, Pat Gefre wrote: > > + > > > + > The patches and a short comment for each: > > + > > + Care to post the patches here so that we can comment on them? > > + > > + greg k-h > > + > > > > I thought I put the url where the patches are. > > You did. You must not have read what Documentation/SubmittingPatches > says to do... Quoting said document: 7) E-mail size. When sending patches to Linus, always follow step #6. Large changes are not appropriate for mailing lists, and some maintainers. If your patch, uncompressed, exceeds 40 kB in size, it is preferred that you store your patch on an Internet-accessible server, and provide instead a URL (link) pointing to your patch. A few of the patches at that URL are very large (one is over 400k). That said, some of the others could probably be posted. Jesse ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Altix I/O code reorganization 2004-08-05 21:32 ` Jesse Barnes @ 2004-08-05 21:36 ` Greg KH 0 siblings, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Greg KH @ 2004-08-05 21:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jesse Barnes; +Cc: Pat Gefre, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 02:32:36PM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote: > > A few of the patches at that URL are very large (one is over 400k). That > said, some of the others could probably be posted. Exactly. They _should_ be posted. greg k-h ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Altix I/O code reorganization 2004-08-04 20:14 Altix I/O code reorganization Pat Gefre ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2004-08-05 20:51 ` Pat Gefre @ 2004-08-06 13:18 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-06 16:19 ` Jesse Barnes 2004-08-11 23:24 ` Patrick Gefre 2004-08-06 13:51 ` Altix I/O code reorganization Keith Owens 2004-08-06 15:47 ` Russ Anderson 5 siblings, 2 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-06 13:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Pat Gefre; +Cc: linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 03:14:08PM -0500, Pat Gefre wrote: > o added new hardware support > o code cleanup (typedefs, include files, etc.) > o simplified the directory structure (all files were arch/ia64/sn/io/ > are now under arch/ia64/sn/ioif/) > o code size reduced by >50% > o major reorg of the code itself > o copyright updates Yikes, this is truely horrible. First your patch ordering doesn't make any sense, with just the first patch applied the system won't work at all. Please submit a series of _small_ patches going from A to B keeping the code working everywhere inbetween. Your new directory structure is very bad. Just stick all files into arch/ia64/sn/io/ instead of adding subdirectories for often just a single file. Now to the contents: 002-pci-fixups: you're adding tons of non-standard SAL calls for who knows what. In fact this pretty much looks like you're just moving the existing crappy code into the prom so the bad Linux guys can't complain about it anymore. Please switch to the standard ACPI PCI probing mechanism all other IA64 machines support and you can get rid of all that. You're duplicating the kernel's PCI to PCI bridge support, with the normal IA64 pci code it would just work.. 003-pci-support: The PCI DMA implementation is still ubercomplicated. See the PCI DMA code I sent you long ago. Of the code in pci_extensions.c only two are actually used in the kernel (snia_pcibr_rrb_alloc and snia_pcidev_endian_set), please remove the unused other ones. 004-pci-bridge_drivers: You still have code dealing with all kinds of PCIIO_ and PCIBR_ flags that will never be set through the Linux interfaces. Again see the DMA mapping code I sent you. 006-bte: Please merge bte_error.c into the existing bte.c 007-io-hub-provider: tio_provider and hub_provider have exactly the same methods, no need to keep the xtalk_provider_t abstraction at all 008-kdb-support-funtions: kdb isn't in mainline, please add the two files to the kdb patch instead ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Altix I/O code reorganization 2004-08-06 13:18 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-06 16:19 ` Jesse Barnes 2004-08-07 10:58 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-11 23:24 ` Patrick Gefre 1 sibling, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Jesse Barnes @ 2004-08-06 16:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: Pat Gefre, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Friday, August 6, 2004 6:18 am, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Yikes, this is truely horrible. First your patch ordering doesn't make > any sense, with just the first patch applied the system won't work at all. > Please submit a series of _small_ patches going from A to B keeping the > code working everywhere inbetween. Much of this stuff is clearly interdependent (and dependent on PROM changes), so I don't think that would make sense. Jesse ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Altix I/O code reorganization 2004-08-06 16:19 ` Jesse Barnes @ 2004-08-07 10:58 ` Christoph Hellwig 0 siblings, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-07 10:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jesse Barnes; +Cc: Pat Gefre, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Fri, Aug 06, 2004 at 09:19:20AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote: > On Friday, August 6, 2004 6:18 am, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Yikes, this is truely horrible. First your patch ordering doesn't make > > any sense, with just the first patch applied the system won't work at all. > > Please submit a series of _small_ patches going from A to B keeping the > > code working everywhere inbetween. > > Much of this stuff is clearly interdependent (and dependent on PROM changes), > so I don't think that would make sense. It's not. E.g. hwgraph removal and dma code rework aren't related to hiding of lots of interfaces in the firmware at all. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Altix I/O code reorganization 2004-08-06 13:18 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-06 16:19 ` Jesse Barnes @ 2004-08-11 23:24 ` Patrick Gefre 2004-08-12 9:15 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-27 15:10 ` Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code Patrick Gefre 1 sibling, 2 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Patrick Gefre @ 2004-08-11 23:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: linux-ia64, linux-kernel I'm sending out a new patch set - the set of files will follow this email. I'll add in this email the comments on the general comments and the comments on the specific pach comments will be in the email for that updated patch - hopefully that makes some kind of sense 8^). I didn't include the small bte change in this set. Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 03:14:08PM -0500, Pat Gefre wrote: > > > Yikes, this is truely horrible. First your patch ordering doesn't make > any sense, with just the first patch applied the system won't work at all. > Please submit a series of _small_ patches going from A to B keeping the code > working everywhere inbetween. > This is a very BIG change. However, the BIG change ends up with very little code in the kernel. The reason is because, we have enhanced the functionalities in our Prom to actually configure and initialize all devices in the system instead of just the BaseIO devices. It is not practical to have small patches that will work independently. The code base is now small enough that we should not have a problem providing feedback. > Your new directory structure is very bad. Just stick all files into > arch/ia64/sn/io/ instead of adding subdirectories for often just a single > file. > We do like our directory structures. It provides very logical separation of code files. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Altix I/O code reorganization 2004-08-11 23:24 ` Patrick Gefre @ 2004-08-12 9:15 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-12 14:47 ` Jesse Barnes 2004-08-27 15:10 ` Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code Patrick Gefre 1 sibling, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-12 9:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Patrick Gefre; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 06:24:43PM -0500, Patrick Gefre wrote: > This is a very BIG change. However, the BIG change ends up with > very little code in the kernel. The reason is because, we have enhanced the > functionalities in our Prom to actually configure and initialize all devices > in the system instead of just the BaseIO devices. Surely it can be spit out. E.g. hwgraph removal is separate from your SAL call stuff which is separate from dma mapping. And, let me repeat: There is absolutely _NO_ interest in adding yet another non-standard prom interface for PCI configuration. IA64 has a standard ACPI-based interface that everyone but SGI implementent. Please implement that one in your firmware. > We do like our directory structures. It provides very logical > separation of code files. You have more subdirectories than everything else in arch/ia64/ combined, go figure. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Altix I/O code reorganization 2004-08-12 9:15 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-12 14:47 ` Jesse Barnes 2004-08-12 15:21 ` Christoph Hellwig 0 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Jesse Barnes @ 2004-08-12 14:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: Patrick Gefre, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Thursday, August 12, 2004 2:15 am, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > And, let me repeat: > > There is absolutely _NO_ interest in adding yet another non-standard > prom interface for PCI configuration. IA64 has a standard ACPI-based > interface that everyone but SGI implementent. Please implement that > one in your firmware. Our platform does not currently support ACPI based PCI discovery and configuration. My claim is that this patchset gets us closer to being able to implement it. You aren't saying that any changes to the codebase should be rejected until ACPI is 100% supported, are you? That seems like a silly stance to take since it precludes incremental improvements in the codebase. IOW, assuming the patchset meets with general approval in other ways, you wouldn't oppose its inclusion just because it doesn't go far enough, would you? Thanks, Jesse ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Altix I/O code reorganization 2004-08-12 14:47 ` Jesse Barnes @ 2004-08-12 15:21 ` Christoph Hellwig 0 siblings, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-12 15:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jesse Barnes; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, Patrick Gefre, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Thu, Aug 12, 2004 at 07:47:02AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote: > Our platform does not currently support ACPI based PCI discovery and > configuration. My claim is that this patchset gets us closer to being able > to implement it. You aren't saying that any changes to the codebase should > be rejected until ACPI is 100% supported, are you? That seems like a silly > stance to take since it precludes incremental improvements in the codebase. Changes to the codebase are just fine. Adding new interface to the prom the duplicate the standard interface for that prupose on IA64 are not fine. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code 2004-08-11 23:24 ` Patrick Gefre 2004-08-12 9:15 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-27 15:10 ` Patrick Gefre 2004-08-27 15:14 ` Patrick Gefre ` (7 more replies) 1 sibling, 8 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Patrick Gefre @ 2004-08-27 15:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Patrick Gefre; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, linux-ia64, linux-kernel This is an update to our last set of patches. I've added some comments from the last review and another synopsis of the patches. The individual patches will follow this email. Comments from the last review: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote: >> >> The PCIIO_ flags are designed for usage at the Device Driver layer, >> while the PCIBR_ flags are designed to be the actual hardware bits that needed >> setting. However, with the latest code, we have deleted the PCIIO_ and >> PCIBR_ flags that are not used. > > > There still are tons that are used in the code, but never logically set from > the exported interfaces. Should be gone. >> and tries to export >> the many hardware features that are available on our system. However, not >> all of these features are "reachable" via the standard Linux PCI mapping >> interfaces. We have removed all unreacheable features. However, we can >> still support future requirements with these new interfaces when needed. >> >> Yes, we did look at your patch dated: December 4th 2003. It was very good, but > > > I mean a more recent patch I sent to Colin. That patch contains xbridge structs which don't belong in our 2.6 code. >+xtalk_provider_t hub_provider = { >> + >> + (xtalk_intr_alloc_f *) sal_xtalk_intr_alloc, >> + (xtalk_intr_free_f *) sal_xtalk_intr_free, >> + >> +}; >> + >> +xtalk_provider_t tio_provider = { >> + >> + (xtalk_intr_alloc_f *) sal_xtalk_intr_alloc, >> + (xtalk_intr_free_f *) sal_xtalk_intr_free, >> + >> +}; > > > you still have it in this patch. Should be gone - the last patch was my fault - I had grabbed an older file. We also flattened our directory structure: $ ls -R arch/ia64/sn/ioif arch/ia64/sn/ioif: io_init.c iomv.c Makefile pci pci_dma.c pci_extension.c arch/ia64/sn/ioif/pci: Makefile pcibr_ate.c pcibr_dma.c pcibr_provider.c pcibr_reg.c xtalk_providers.c Note the diffstat output - we are purging a lot of code: 114 files changed, 4679 insertions(+), 46952 deletions(-) We made some changes to our SAL call interface - once we get ACPI going, we will remove all these SAL calls. EFI 1.10 and ACPI compliance will be the next 2 phases in our development. Patch synopsis: We have reorganized the I/O layer in the Altix code. We are posting this code for review before submitting for inclusion in the 2.6 tree. The patch set is at: ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/sn2/sn2-update/ It is based off http://lia64.bkbits.net/linux-ia64-test-2.6.8.1 The general changes are: I/O discovery and initialization was moved to prom to enable us to move towards EFI 1.10 and ACPI compliance. EFI 1.10 and ACPI compliance will be the next 2 phases in our development. Since prom is now performing all I/O discovery and initialization, we had to re-architect the Altix platform specific code in Linux - basically deleting all code related to discovery and initialization and leaving DMA mapping which was rewritten. Until we can implement ACPI in our prom, we will use platform specific SAL calls to retrieve any PCI configuration that is needed during the PCI fixup phase. diffstat of all patches: arch/ia64/sn/io/Makefile | 13 arch/ia64/sn/io/cdl.c | 79 arch/ia64/sn/io/drivers/Makefile | 10 arch/ia64/sn/io/drivers/ioconfig_bus.c | 382 arch/ia64/sn/io/hwgfs/Makefile | 10 arch/ia64/sn/io/hwgfs/hcl.c | 702 - arch/ia64/sn/io/hwgfs/hcl_util.c | 175 arch/ia64/sn/io/hwgfs/interface.c | 325 arch/ia64/sn/io/hwgfs/labelcl.c | 656 - arch/ia64/sn/io/hwgfs/ramfs.c | 208 arch/ia64/sn/io/io.c | 739 - arch/ia64/sn/io/machvec/Makefile | 10 arch/ia64/sn/io/machvec/iomv.c | 76 arch/ia64/sn/io/machvec/pci.c | 52 arch/ia64/sn/io/machvec/pci_bus_cvlink.c | 909 - arch/ia64/sn/io/machvec/pci_dma.c | 677 - arch/ia64/sn/io/platform_init/Makefile | 10 arch/ia64/sn/io/platform_init/sgi_io_init.c | 174 arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/Makefile | 14 arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/bte_error.c | 217 arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/geo_op.c | 311 arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/klconflib.c | 572 arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/klgraph.c | 577 arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/l1_command.c | 131 arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/ml_SN_init.c | 109 arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/ml_SN_intr.c | 320 arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/ml_iograph.c | 770 - arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/module.c | 236 arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/pcibr/Makefile | 16 arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/pcibr/pcibr_ate.c | 178 arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/pcibr/pcibr_config.c | 195 arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/pcibr/pcibr_dvr.c | 2662 ---- arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/pcibr/pcibr_error.c | 1873 --- arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/pcibr/pcibr_hints.c | 175 arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/pcibr/pcibr_intr.c | 700 - arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/pcibr/pcibr_reg.c | 879 - arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/pcibr/pcibr_rrb.c | 887 - arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/pcibr/pcibr_slot.c | 1842 --- arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/pciio.c | 1004 - arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/pic.c | 835 - arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/shub.c | 246 arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/shub_intr.c | 259 arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/shuberror.c | 822 - arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/shubio.c | 490 arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/xbow.c | 1020 - arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/xtalk.c | 927 - arch/ia64/sn/io/snia_if.c | 108 arch/ia64/sn/io/xswitch.c | 168 include/asm-ia64/sn/pci/bridge.h | 1895 --- include/asm-ia64/sn/pci/pci_bus_cvlink.h | 70 include/asm-ia64/sn/pci/pci_defs.h | 414 include/asm-ia64/sn/pci/pcibr.h | 535 include/asm-ia64/sn/pci/pcibr_private.h | 811 - include/asm-ia64/sn/pci/pciio.h | 746 - include/asm-ia64/sn/pci/pciio_private.h | 145 include/asm-ia64/sn/sn2/shub_md.h | 275 include/asm-ia64/sn/sn2/shub_mmr_t.h |14829 ------------------------- include/asm-ia64/sn/sn2/sn_private.h | 245 include/asm-ia64/sn/xtalk/xswitch.h | 56 include/asm-ia64/sn/xtalk/xtalk.h | 360 include/asm-ia64/sn/xtalk/xtalk_private.h | 79 include/asm-ia64/sn/xtalk/xtalkaddrs.h | 106 include/asm-ia64/sn/xtalk/xwidget.h | 240 arch/ia64/sn/Makefile | 2 arch/ia64/sn/ioif/Makefile | 16 arch/ia64/sn/ioif/io_init.c | 438 arch/ia64/sn/ioif/iomv.c | 76 arch/ia64/sn/ioif/pci/Makefile | 12 arch/ia64/sn/ioif/pci/pcibr_ate.c | 187 arch/ia64/sn/ioif/pci/pcibr_dma.c | 305 arch/ia64/sn/ioif/pci/pcibr_provider.c | 225 arch/ia64/sn/ioif/pci/pcibr_reg.c | 332 arch/ia64/sn/ioif/pci/xtalk_providers.c | 50 arch/ia64/sn/ioif/pci_dma.c | 573 arch/ia64/sn/ioif/pci_extension.c | 33 arch/ia64/sn/kernel/irq.c | 436 arch/ia64/sn/kernel/setup.c | 333 include/asm-ia64/sn/addrs.h | 23 include/asm-ia64/sn/arch.h | 5 include/asm-ia64/sn/geo.h | 31 include/asm-ia64/sn/hcl.h | 52 include/asm-ia64/sn/intr.h | 2 include/asm-ia64/sn/io.h | 2 include/asm-ia64/sn/iograph.h | 26 include/asm-ia64/sn/klconfig.h | 208 include/asm-ia64/sn/ksys/l1.h | 4 include/asm-ia64/sn/module.h | 55 include/asm-ia64/sn/nodepda.h | 60 include/asm-ia64/sn/pci/pcibr_provider.h | 188 include/asm-ia64/sn/pci/pcibus_provider_defs.h | 120 include/asm-ia64/sn/pci/pcidev.h | 58 include/asm-ia64/sn/pci/pic.h | 360 include/asm-ia64/sn/pci/tiocp.h | 256 include/asm-ia64/sn/pda.h | 3 include/asm-ia64/sn/router.h | 7 include/asm-ia64/sn/sgi.h | 23 include/asm-ia64/sn/sn2/addrs.h | 58 include/asm-ia64/sn/sn2/arch.h | 3 include/asm-ia64/sn/sn2/geo.h | 7 include/asm-ia64/sn/sn2/intr.h | 29 include/asm-ia64/sn/sn2/shub.h | 3 include/asm-ia64/sn/sn2/shubio.h | 1669 +- include/asm-ia64/sn/sn2/tio.h | 45 include/asm-ia64/sn/sn_cpuid.h | 8 include/asm-ia64/sn/sn_sal.h | 63 include/asm-ia64/sn/sndrv.h | 1 include/asm-ia64/sn/types.h | 2 include/asm-ia64/sn/xtalk/corelet.h | 22 include/asm-ia64/sn/xtalk/hubdev.h | 61 include/asm-ia64/sn/xtalk/xbow.h | 456 include/asm-ia64/sn/xtalk/xbow_info.h | 2 include/asm-ia64/sn/xtalk/xtalk_provider.h | 52 include/asm-ia64/sn/xtalk/xtalk_sal.h | 20 include/asm-ia64/sn/xtalk/xwidgetdev.h | 73 114 files changed, 4679 insertions(+), 46952 deletions(-) The patches and a short comment for each: 001-kill-files 002-kill-files 003-kill-files 004-kill-files 005-kill-files # contains deleted files 006-pci-fixup # The io_init.c file replaces the pci_bus_cvlink.c. A diff of the files # would not make much sense as the functionalities provided in pci_bus_cvlink.c # are no longer needed. The new functions needed are: # # 1. Getting Platform Specific Information for PCI Buses/Devices. # 2. Getting Hardware Workaround Information. # 3. Getting I/O Hub Information. # # The io_init.c file basically contains all the routines that are needed to # allow a PCI Device Driver to perform Interrupts, PIOs and DMAs. 007-pci-support # There are some minor changes in these files. The biggest change is that we have # broken up the SN Platform Specific DMA mapping interfaces into 3 different # routines: # # 1. 32Bit Direct Mapping. # 2. 32Bit PMU Mapping. # 3. 64Bit Direct Mapping. # # The SN Platform has 3 different PCI/PCIX Bridges. They are not all exactly the # same, however they do provide the same functionality. We have abstracted # the DMA mapping calls so that the caller will not have to be aware of the # hardware differences. Example: # # *dma_handle = (*provider->dmatrans_direct64)(pcidev_info, phys_addr, # PCIIO_DMA_CMD | PCIIO_DMA_A64); # # The Bus Driver for this card, determines the appropriate method. # 008-pci-bridge-drivers-new 009-pci-bridge-drivers-kill 010-pci-bridge-drivers-new # This set of new files supports 2 of our 3 PCI Bridges, PIC and TIOCP. 011-misc-sources # code cleanup # ran thru Lindent # changes needed for new I/O structure 012-new-includes-pci 013-new-includes-xtalk # New includes with definitions for PCI devices, buses, and I/O hubs 014-include-changes 015-include-changes 016-include-changes 017-include-changes # code cleanup # misc changes needed for new I/O structure 018-new-include-tio # New include for TIO defs 019-kill-hwgraph # kill the hwgraph code 020-kill-files # more file zapping 021-Makefile-cleanup # fix upper level Makefile for new directory 022-Makefile-killing 023-pci-include-killing 024-sn2-include-killing 025-new-include-tiocp 026-xtalk-include-killing # more file purging - add one new include for tiocp ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code 2004-08-27 15:10 ` Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code Patrick Gefre @ 2004-08-27 15:14 ` Patrick Gefre 2004-08-27 15:21 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-27 15:23 ` Pat Gefre ` (6 subsequent siblings) 7 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Patrick Gefre @ 2004-08-27 15:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Patrick Gefre; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, linux-ia64, linux-kernel Patch 1 of 26 This patch is too large for email see: ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/sn2/sn2-update/001-kill-files ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code 2004-08-27 15:14 ` Patrick Gefre @ 2004-08-27 15:21 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-27 15:35 ` Patrick Gefre 0 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-27 15:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Patrick Gefre; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 10:14:23AM -0500, Patrick Gefre wrote: > > Patch 1 of 26 > > This patch is too large for email see: > > ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/sn2/sn2-update/001-kill-files Stoop again. This absolutely does not look like a change after which the tree build, right? After how many of the patches do we get a useable kernel for SN2? Please split your changes into LOGICAL steps, e.g. - dma mapping rework - usage of SAL interfaces - hwgrpah removal - renaming of files without code changes - addition of new hardware support - etc.. everything else is simply not reviewable. (and the above is intentionally an order which I think would make sense) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code 2004-08-27 15:21 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-27 15:35 ` Patrick Gefre 2004-08-27 15:44 ` Christoph Hellwig 0 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Patrick Gefre @ 2004-08-27 15:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: linux-ia64, linux-kernel Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 10:14:23AM -0500, Patrick Gefre wrote: > >>Patch 1 of 26 >> >>This patch is too large for email see: >> >>ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/sn2/sn2-update/001-kill-files > > > > Stoop again. This absolutely does not look like a change after which the > tree build, right? After how many of the patches do we get a useable Right > kernel for SN2? Please split your changes into LOGICAL steps, e.g. 26 - hence the 1 of 26 > > - dma mapping rework > - usage of SAL interfaces > - hwgrpah removal > - renaming of files without code changes > - addition of new hardware support > - etc.. > The code was completely redone. It was not done in sections. Breaking them into pieces is nothing more than an academic exercise. It is not useable until all the code changes have been made because it would require a prom that followed these changes. The point of a review was to get comments on the CONTENT of the code not the format of the patches. > everything else is simply not reviewable. (and the above is intentionally > an order which I think would make sense) The easiest way to review is to delete the old directorory and apply the new ioif files. Reviewing it as patches doesn't make any sense. The new code is very small and it should be possible to look at it intact. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code 2004-08-27 15:35 ` Patrick Gefre @ 2004-08-27 15:44 ` Christoph Hellwig 0 siblings, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-27 15:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Patrick Gefre; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 10:35:48AM -0500, Patrick Gefre wrote: > The code was completely redone. It was not done in sections. Breaking them into > pieces is nothing more than an academic exercise. It is not useable until all > the code changes have been made because it would require a prom that followed these > changes. The point of a review was to get comments on the CONTENT of the code not > the format of the patches. This might be true for some parts, for others it certainy isn't. E.g. pci dma code still loooks remarkably similar to the old one, the klconfig code is only stripped down a little, there's quite a few changes in the headers that don't make much sense. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code 2004-08-27 15:10 ` Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code Patrick Gefre 2004-08-27 15:14 ` Patrick Gefre @ 2004-08-27 15:23 ` Pat Gefre 2004-08-27 15:36 ` Christoph Hellwig ` (5 subsequent siblings) 7 siblings, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Pat Gefre @ 2004-08-27 15:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel; +Cc: linux-ia64, hch Patch 2 of 26 # This is a BitKeeper generated diff -Nru style patch. # # ChangeSet # 2004/08/25 10:54:51-05:00 pfg@sgi.com # kill ioconfig_bus # # BitKeeper/deleted/.del-ioconfig_bus.c~6cf1ae3dd328053d # 2004/08/25 10:54:11-05:00 pfg@sgi.com +0 -0 # Delete: arch/ia64/sn/io/drivers/ioconfig_bus.c # diff -Nru a/arch/ia64/sn/io/drivers/ioconfig_bus.c b/arch/ia64/sn/io/drivers/ioconfig_bus.c --- a/arch/ia64/sn/io/drivers/ioconfig_bus.c 2004-08-25 11:01:36 -05:00 +++ /dev/null Wed Dec 31 16:00:00 196900 @@ -1,382 +0,0 @@ -/* - * This file is subject to the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public - * License. See the file "COPYING" in the main directory of this archive - * for more details. - * - * ioconfig_bus - SGI's Persistent PCI Bus Numbering. - * - * Copyright (C) 1992-1997, 2000-2003 Silicon Graphics, Inc. All rights reserved. - */ - -#include <linux/types.h> -#include <linux/slab.h> -#include <linux/ctype.h> -#include <linux/module.h> -#include <linux/init.h> - -#include <linux/pci.h> - -#include <asm/uaccess.h> -#include <asm/sn/sgi.h> -#include <asm/io.h> -#include <asm/sn/iograph.h> -#include <asm/sn/hcl.h> -#include <asm/sn/labelcl.h> -#include <asm/sn/sn_sal.h> -#include <asm/sn/addrs.h> -#include <asm/sn/ioconfig_bus.h> - -#define SGI_IOCONFIG_BUS "SGI-PERSISTENT PCI BUS NUMBERING" -#define SGI_IOCONFIG_BUS_VERSION "1.0" - -/* - * Some Global definitions. - */ -static vertex_hdl_t ioconfig_bus_handle; -static unsigned long ioconfig_bus_debug; -static struct ioconfig_parm parm; - -#ifdef IOCONFIG_BUS_DEBUG -#define DBG(x...) printk(x) -#else -#define DBG(x...) -#endif - -static u64 ioconfig_activated; -static char ioconfig_kernopts[128]; - -/* - * For debugging purpose .. hardcode a table .. - */ -struct ascii_moduleid *ioconfig_bus_table; - -static int free_entry; -static int new_entry; - -int next_basebus_number; - -void -ioconfig_get_busnum(char *io_moduleid, int *bus_num) -{ - struct ascii_moduleid *temp; - int index; - - DBG("ioconfig_get_busnum io_moduleid %s\n", io_moduleid); - - *bus_num = -1; - temp = ioconfig_bus_table; - if (!ioconfig_bus_table) - return; - for (index = 0; index < free_entry; temp++, index++) { - if ( (io_moduleid[0] = temp->io_moduleid[0]) && - (io_moduleid[1] = temp->io_moduleid[1]) && - (io_moduleid[2] = temp->io_moduleid[2]) && - (io_moduleid[4] = temp->io_moduleid[4]) && - (io_moduleid[5] = temp->io_moduleid[5]) ) { - *bus_num = index * 0x10; - return; - } - } - - /* - * New IO Brick encountered. - */ - if (((int)io_moduleid[0]) = 0) { - DBG("ioconfig_get_busnum: Invalid Module Id given %s\n", io_moduleid); - return; - } - - io_moduleid[3] = '#'; - strcpy((char *)&(ioconfig_bus_table[free_entry].io_moduleid), io_moduleid); - *bus_num = free_entry * 0x10; - free_entry++; -} - -static void -dump_ioconfig_table(void) -{ - - int index = 0; - struct ascii_moduleid *temp; - - temp = ioconfig_bus_table; - if (!temp) { - DBG("ioconfig_bus_table tabel empty\n"); - return; - } - while (index < free_entry) { - DBG("ASSCI Module ID %s\n", temp->io_moduleid); - temp++; - index++; - } -} - -/* - * nextline - * This routine returns the nextline in the buffer. - */ -int nextline(char *buffer, char **next, char *line) -{ - - char *temp; - - if (buffer[0] = 0x0) { - return(0); - } - - temp = buffer; - while (*temp != 0) { - *line = *temp; - if (*temp != '\n'){ - *line = *temp; - temp++; line++; - } else - break; - } - - if (*temp = 0) - *next = temp; - else - *next = ++temp; - - return(1); -} - -/* - * build_pcibus_name - * This routine parses the ioconfig contents read into - * memory by ioconfig command in EFI and builds the - * persistent pci bus naming table. - */ -int -build_moduleid_table(char *file_contents, struct ascii_moduleid *table) -{ - /* - * Read the whole file into memory. - */ - int rc; - char *name; - char *temp; - char *next; - char *curr; - char *line; - struct ascii_moduleid *moduleid; - - line = kmalloc(256, GFP_KERNEL); - name = kmalloc(125, GFP_KERNEL); - if (!line || !name) { - if (line) - kfree(line); - if (name) - kfree(name); - printk("build_moduleid_table(): Unabled to allocate memmory"); - return -ENOMEM; - } - - memset(line, 0,256); - memset(name, 0, 125); - moduleid = table; - curr = file_contents; - while (nextline(curr, &next, line)){ - - DBG("curr 0x%lx next 0x%lx\n", curr, next); - - temp = line; - /* - * Skip all leading Blank lines .. - */ - while (isspace(*temp)) - if (*temp != '\n') - temp++; - else - break; - - if (*temp = '\n') { - curr = next; - memset(line, 0, 256); - continue; - } - - /* - * Skip comment lines - */ - if (*temp = '#') { - curr = next; - memset(line, 0, 256); - continue; - } - - /* - * Get the next free entry in the table. - */ - rc = sscanf(temp, "%s", name); - strcpy(&moduleid->io_moduleid[0], name); - DBG("Found %s\n", name); - moduleid++; - free_entry++; - curr = next; - memset(line, 0, 256); - } - - new_entry = free_entry; - kfree(line); - kfree(name); - - return 0; -} - -int -ioconfig_bus_init(void) -{ - - DBG("ioconfig_bus_init called.\n"); - - ioconfig_bus_table = kmalloc( 512, GFP_KERNEL ); - if (!ioconfig_bus_table) { - printk("ioconfig_bus_init : cannot allocate memory\n"); - return -1; - } - - memset(ioconfig_bus_table, 0, 512); - - /* - * If ioconfig options are given on the bootline .. take it. - */ - if (*ioconfig_kernopts != '\0') { - /* - * ioconfig="..." kernel options given. - */ - DBG("ioconfig_bus_init: Kernel Options given.\n"); - if ( build_moduleid_table((char *)ioconfig_kernopts, ioconfig_bus_table) < 0 ) - return -1; - (void) dump_ioconfig_table(); - } - return 0; -} - -void -ioconfig_bus_new_entries(void) -{ - int index; - struct ascii_moduleid *temp; - - if ((ioconfig_activated) && (free_entry > new_entry)) { - printk("### Please add the following new IO Bricks Module ID \n"); - printk("### to your Persistent Bus Numbering Config File\n"); - } else - return; - - index = new_entry; - if (!ioconfig_bus_table) { - printk("ioconfig_bus_table table is empty\n"); - return; - } - temp = &ioconfig_bus_table[index]; - while (index < free_entry) { - printk("%s\n", (char *)temp); - temp++; - index++; - } - printk("### End\n"); - -} -static int ioconfig_bus_ioctl(struct inode * inode, struct file * file, - unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg) -{ - /* - * Copy in the parameters. - */ - if (copy_from_user(&parm, (char *)arg, sizeof(struct ioconfig_parm))) - return -EFAULT; - parm.number = free_entry - new_entry; - parm.ioconfig_activated = ioconfig_activated; - if (copy_to_user((char *)arg, &parm, sizeof(struct ioconfig_parm))) - return -EFAULT; - - if (!ioconfig_bus_table) - return -EFAULT; - - if (copy_to_user((char *)parm.buffer, &ioconfig_bus_table[new_entry], sizeof(struct ascii_moduleid) * (free_entry - new_entry))) - return -EFAULT; - - return 0; -} - -/* - * ioconfig_bus_open - Opens the special device node "/dev/hw/.ioconfig_bus". - */ -static int ioconfig_bus_open(struct inode * inode, struct file * filp) -{ - if (ioconfig_bus_debug) { - DBG("ioconfig_bus_open called.\n"); - } - - return(0); - -} - -/* - * ioconfig_bus_close - Closes the special device node "/dev/hw/.ioconfig_bus". - */ -static int ioconfig_bus_close(struct inode * inode, struct file * filp) -{ - - if (ioconfig_bus_debug) { - DBG("ioconfig_bus_close called.\n"); - } - - return(0); -} - -struct file_operations ioconfig_bus_fops = { - .ioctl = ioconfig_bus_ioctl, - .open = ioconfig_bus_open, /* open */ - .release=ioconfig_bus_close /* release */ -}; - - -/* - * init_ifconfig_bus() - Boot time initialization. Ensure that it is called - * after hwgfs has been initialized. - * - */ -int init_ioconfig_bus(void) -{ - ioconfig_bus_handle = hwgraph_register(hwgraph_root, ".ioconfig_bus", - 0, 0, - 0, 0, - S_IFCHR | S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IRGRP, 0, 0, - &ioconfig_bus_fops, NULL); - - if (ioconfig_bus_handle = NULL) { - panic("Unable to create SGI PERSISTENT BUS NUMBERING Driver.\n"); - } - - return 0; -} - -static int __init ioconfig_bus_setup (char *str) -{ - - char *temp; - - DBG("ioconfig_bus_setup: Kernel Options %s\n", str); - - temp = (char *)ioconfig_kernopts; - memset(temp, 0, 128); - while ( (*str != '\0') && !isspace (*str) ) { - if (*str = ',') { - *temp = '\n'; - temp++; - str++; - continue; - } - *temp = *str; - temp++; - str++; - } - - return(0); - -} -__setup("ioconfig=", ioconfig_bus_setup); ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code 2004-08-27 15:10 ` Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code Patrick Gefre 2004-08-27 15:14 ` Patrick Gefre 2004-08-27 15:23 ` Pat Gefre @ 2004-08-27 15:36 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-27 15:45 ` Christoph Hellwig ` (4 subsequent siblings) 7 siblings, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-27 15:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Patrick Gefre; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 10:10:01AM -0500, Patrick Gefre wrote: > io_init.c iomv.c Makefile pci pci_dma.c pci_extension.c > > arch/ia64/sn/ioif/pci: > Makefile pcibr_ate.c pcibr_dma.c pcibr_provider.c pcibr_reg.c xtalk_providers.c > So why are pci_dma.c and pci_extensions.c not under pci? You probably should just kill that pci subdir, too when there's just two other files left. Or move those two to kernel/ and have a pci/ subdir which seems to fit other ports quite well. But I'd rather see the functional changes first and then do renaming of unchanged files last anyway so you changed get actually reviewable. The current patchkit is not. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code 2004-08-27 15:10 ` Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code Patrick Gefre ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2004-08-27 15:36 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-27 15:45 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-27 16:32 ` Patrick Gefre 2004-08-27 15:54 ` Christoph Hellwig ` (3 subsequent siblings) 7 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-27 15:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Patrick Gefre; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 10:10:01AM -0500, Patrick Gefre wrote: > > This is an update to our last set of patches. I've added some comments from the > last review and another synopsis of the patches. The individual patches will > follow this email. Applying this against current BK gives a reject in arch/ia64/sn/io/machvec/pci_bus_cvlink.c for the 6th patch ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code 2004-08-27 15:45 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-27 16:32 ` Patrick Gefre 0 siblings, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Patrick Gefre @ 2004-08-27 16:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: linux-ia64, linux-kernel Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 10:10:01AM -0500, Patrick Gefre wrote: > >>This is an update to our last set of patches. I've added some comments from the >>last review and another synopsis of the patches. The individual patches will >>follow this email. > > > Applying this against current BK gives a reject in > arch/ia64/sn/io/machvec/pci_bus_cvlink.c for the 6th patch > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html I used the tree at http://lia64.bkbits.net/linux-ia64-test-2.6.8.1 from yesterday ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code 2004-08-27 15:10 ` Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code Patrick Gefre ` (3 preceding siblings ...) 2004-08-27 15:45 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-27 15:54 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-27 16:06 ` Patrick Gefre 2004-08-27 16:21 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-27 17:15 ` Christoph Hellwig ` (2 subsequent siblings) 7 siblings, 2 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-27 15:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Patrick Gefre; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 10:10:01AM -0500, Patrick Gefre wrote: > > This is an update to our last set of patches. I've added some comments from the > last review and another synopsis of the patches. The individual patches will > follow this email. Matthew Wilcox suggested we should really review it as completely new code. So maybe you should split it into one patch that kills all old code ånd one that adds new code. Note that I mean all all code includeing the headers which provides a nice opporuntiy to move all of them that aren't public interface inside arch/ia64/sn/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code 2004-08-27 15:54 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-27 16:06 ` Patrick Gefre 2004-08-27 16:21 ` Christoph Hellwig 1 sibling, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Patrick Gefre @ 2004-08-27 16:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: linux-ia64, linux-kernel Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 10:10:01AM -0500, Patrick Gefre wrote: > >>This is an update to our last set of patches. I've added some comments from the >>last review and another synopsis of the patches. The individual patches will >>follow this email. > > > Matthew Wilcox suggested we should really review it as completely new > code. So maybe you should split it into one patch that kills all old > code end one that adds new code. Note that I mean all all code includeing > the headers which provides a nice opporuntiy to move all of them that > aren't public interface inside arch/ia64/sn/ > This makes sense. I'll start working on this right away. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code 2004-08-27 15:54 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-27 16:06 ` Patrick Gefre @ 2004-08-27 16:21 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-09-03 23:40 ` Christoph Hellwig 1 sibling, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-27 16:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Patrick Gefre, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 04:54:43PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 10:10:01AM -0500, Patrick Gefre wrote: > > > > This is an update to our last set of patches. I've added some comments from the > > last review and another synopsis of the patches. The individual patches will > > follow this email. > > Matthew Wilcox suggested we should really review it as completely new > code. So maybe you should split it into one patch that kills all old > code ånd one that adds new code. Note that I mean all all code includeing > the headers which provides a nice opporuntiy to move all of them that > aren't public interface inside arch/ia64/sn/ Okay, let's start a review for the actual files based on that all files: lots of missing statics, try running http://samba.org/ftp/unpacked/junkcode/findstatic.pl over the compiled code. io_init.c: - sal_get_hubdev_info umm, you're getting a kernel pointer by a SAL call. I wonders how this is supposed to work when the kernel changes it's VA layout. (Dito for a bunch of other functions) - sn_io_init what's going on here? iomv.c: - okay, could use some reformatting to fit 80 chars pci_dma.c: - still using all those indirections althoug there's only a single backend pci_extension.c: - dito. Why does this single function need a separate file? pcibr_ate.c: - doesn't look to bad, but should probably merged into pcibr_dma.c. And the trivial < 10 line function opencoded in their only callers. pcibr_dma.c: - okay pcibr_provider.c actual code code looks okay, but: - sal_pcibr_slot_enable/sal_pcibr_slot_disabl are completely unused - the pci_provider abstraction is right now completely useless, please add such abstractions only when you need them (and if you'll ever need that a few hints: stop that casting of methods silliness but use container_of, use C99 initializers, stop the typedef abuse) - request_irq return value needs checking pcibr_reg.c: - all this casting is rather horrible. At least keep a pointer to each of struct tiocp and pic_s (and kill the _s postifx) in syruct pcibus_info. the volatiles looks bogus, if you need it you're missing memorry barries. xtalk_providers.c: - bogus indirection again. if you actually do have different lowlevel implementations they should be hidden inside the prom. While at it I think the two calls could just move to arch/ia64/sn/kernel/irq.c ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code 2004-08-27 16:21 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-09-03 23:40 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-09-07 22:10 ` Patrick Gefre 0 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-09-03 23:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig, Patrick Gefre, linux-ia64, linux-kernel Crosscheck of your new code vs the review: > io_init.c: > > - sal_get_hubdev_info > umm, you're getting a kernel pointer by a SAL > call. I wonders how this is supposed to work when the kernel > changes it's VA layout. (Dito for a bunch of other functions) Still not explanation > - sn_io_init > what's going on here? gone > iomv.c: > > - okay, could use some reformatting to fit 80 chars ok > pci_dma.c: > > - still using all those indirections althoug there's only a single backend this comment is fixed, but the one later sent in private (stupid choice of interface beteen upper pci dma code and pcibr code ignored) > pci_extension.c: > > - dito. Why does this single function need a separate file? Not addressed. In general your file organization is mess still. Just do arch/ia64/sn/pci/ for all pci code and move the rest to arch/ia64/sn/kernel. That how most arches work. > pcibr_ate.c: > > - doesn't look to bad, but should probably merged into pcibr_dma.c. And > the trivial < 10 line function opencoded in their only callers. Not addressed or commented on yet. > pcibr_provider.c > > actual code code looks okay, but: > > - sal_pcibr_slot_enable/sal_pcibr_slot_disabl are completely unused you still have typedefs for these around > - the pci_provider abstraction is right now completely useless, please > add such abstractions only when you need them (and if you'll ever need > that a few hints: stop that casting of methods silliness but use > container_of, use C99 initializers, stop the typedef abuse) ok > - request_irq return value needs checking ok > > pcibr_reg.c: > > - all this casting is rather horrible. At least keep a pointer to each > of struct tiocp and pic_s (and kill the _s postifx) in syruct pcibus_info. > the volatiles looks bogus, if you need it you're missing memorry barries. the type pointer isn't done. Any specific reason? > xtalk_providers.c: > > - bogus indirection again. if you actually do have different lowlevel > implementations they should be hidden inside the prom. While at it I think > the two calls could just move to arch/ia64/sn/kernel/irq.c ok More items: - sal_pcibr_rrb_alloc should be merged into its only caller - io_init.c still has KDB ifdefs - sn_pci_set_vchan should absolutely _not_ be placed in qla1280.c, and while you're at it there extern for snia_pcibr_rrb_alloc should move to a header - kill HUBREG_CAST instead of touching it - please don't put your ASSERT into asm/ headers. In general you should use BUG_ON - why do you add a pfn_t typedef that's not used anywhere - the patch adds include/asm-ia64/sn/xtalk/xtalk_provider.h but there's no more xtalk providers Your headers are still a complete mess. There's no point exposing tons of defails about the pci interface in include/asm - just keep and pci_extensions.h there for non-standard PCI APIs, and the rest should stay private inisde arch/ia64/sn/pci/. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code 2004-09-03 23:40 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-09-07 22:10 ` Patrick Gefre 2004-09-07 22:16 ` Christoph Hellwig 0 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Patrick Gefre @ 2004-09-07 22:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: linux-ia64, linux-kernel Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Crosscheck of your new code vs the review: > > > >io_init.c: > > > > - sal_get_hubdev_info > > umm, you're getting a kernel pointer by a SAL > > call. I wonders how this is supposed to work when the kernel > > changes it's VA layout. (Dito for a bunch of other functions) > > I will change the ptr passed to a physical address. > > - sn_io_init > > what's going on here? > > gone > > > iomv.c: > > > > - okay, could use some reformatting to fit 80 chars > > ok > > > pci_dma.c: > > > > - still using all those indirections althoug there's only a single backend > > this comment is fixed, but the one later sent in private (stupid choice > of interface beteen upper pci dma code and pcibr code ignored) > Guess I'm confused about this then. Are you suggesting putting the pcibr_dma files into the pci_dma.c code and not having a pcibr_dma interface ?? The api is there because pcibr is an ASIC and is ASIC specific. > > pci_extension.c: > > > > - dito. Why does this single function need a separate file? > > Not addressed. In general your file organization is mess still. > How is this: arch/ia64/sn/pci/ pci_dma.c pci_extension.c pcibr/ pcibr_ate.c pcibr_dma.c pcibr_provider.c pcibr_reg.c arch/ia64/sn/kernel/ bte_error.c io_init.c iomv.c Since pcibr is an ASIC it makes sense for it to have its own directory. There are other ASIC interfaces that will be put in in the not too distant future and they will go in separate directories also. > Just do arch/ia64/sn/pci/ for all pci code and move the rest to > arch/ia64/sn/kernel. That how most arches work. > > > pcibr_ate.c: > > > > - doesn't look to bad, but should probably merged into pcibr_dma.c. And > > the trivial < 10 line function opencoded in their only callers. > > Not addressed or commented on yet. > I will inline free_ate_resource(), alloc_ate_resource() and ate_write(). I want to keep the ate code in a separate file - since it is a group of functions with a similar theme and is non-trivial. > > pcibr_provider.c > > > > actual code code looks okay, but: > > > > - sal_pcibr_slot_enable/sal_pcibr_slot_disabl are completely unused > > you still have typedefs for these around > Missed them - I'll take them out. > > - the pci_provider abstraction is right now completely useless, please > > add such abstractions only when you need them (and if you'll ever need > > that a few hints: stop that casting of methods silliness but use > > container_of, use C99 initializers, stop the typedef abuse) > > ok > > > - request_irq return value needs checking > > ok >> > pcibr_reg.c: > > > > - all this casting is rather horrible. At least keep a pointer to each > > of struct tiocp and pic_s (and kill the _s postifx) in syruct pcibus_info. > > the volatiles looks bogus, if you need it you're missing memorry barries. > > the type pointer isn't done. Any specific reason? > I'm confused on this too. The struct defs are for different MMR sets - so we do need to use different types of pointers. > > xtalk_providers.c: > > > > - bogus indirection again. if you actually do have different lowlevel > > implementations they should be hidden inside the prom. While at it I think > > the two calls could just move to arch/ia64/sn/kernel/irq.c > > ok > > More items: > > - sal_pcibr_rrb_alloc should be merged into its only caller I'll move the sal_pcibr_rrb_alloc() code into snia_pcibr_rrb_alloc() > - io_init.c still has KDB ifdefs Sorry, missed this.... > - sn_pci_set_vchan should absolutely _not_ be placed in qla1280.c, I'll fix this. > and while you're at it there extern for snia_pcibr_rrb_alloc should > move to a header OK. > - kill HUBREG_CAST instead of touching it OK. > - please don't put your ASSERT into asm/ headers. In general you > should use BUG_ON OK. > - why do you add a pfn_t typedef that's not used anywhere > - the patch adds include/asm-ia64/sn/xtalk/xtalk_provider.h but there's > no more xtalk providers > Missed these too. > Your headers are still a complete mess. There's no point exposing tons > of defails about the pci interface in include/asm - just keep and > pci_extensions.h there for non-standard PCI APIs, and the rest should > stay private inisde arch/ia64/sn/pci/. I'll work on fixing this up. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code 2004-09-07 22:10 ` Patrick Gefre @ 2004-09-07 22:16 ` Christoph Hellwig 0 siblings, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-09-07 22:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Patrick Gefre; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 05:10:25PM -0500, Patrick Gefre wrote: > > of interface beteen upper pci dma code and pcibr code ignored) > > > > Guess I'm confused about this then. Are you suggesting putting the pcibr_dma files > into the pci_dma.c code and not having a pcibr_dma interface ?? The api is there because > pcibr is an ASIC and is ASIC specific. No, absolutely not. I suggested you remove the remaining ASIC-specific bits from pci_dma.c, namely the decision when to use direct translation and where to use ates, and the flags and only have a single mapping routine calling into pcibr code with a prototype ala: dma_addr_t picbr_dma_map(struct pci_dev *dev, unsigned long phys, size_t size); > > > pci_extension.c: > > > > > > - dito. Why does this single function need a separate file? > > > > Not addressed. In general your file organization is mess still. > > > > How is this: > arch/ia64/sn/pci/ > pci_dma.c > pci_extension.c > pcibr/ > pcibr_ate.c > pcibr_dma.c > pcibr_provider.c > pcibr_reg.c > > arch/ia64/sn/kernel/ > bte_error.c > io_init.c > iomv.c > > Since pcibr is an ASIC it makes sense for it to have its own directory. There are > other ASIC interfaces that will be put in in the not too distant future and they > will go in separate directories also. Isn't the pcibr_ prefix enough? This isn't something that would hold up merging, but I think the additional level is a little silly. > I will inline free_ate_resource(), alloc_ate_resource() and ate_write(). I want to > keep the ate code in a separate file - since it is a group of functions with a similar > theme and is non-trivial. Okay.. > > > of struct tiocp and pic_s (and kill the _s postifx) in syruct pcibus_info. > > > the volatiles looks bogus, if you need it you're missing memorry barries. > > > > the type pointer isn't done. Any specific reason? > > > > I'm confused on this too. The struct defs are for different MMR sets - so we do need > to use different types of pointers. What about adding an union of both _typed_ pointers so you don't need to cast everytime? Anyway, it looks like we're making nice progress, thanks for the work. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code 2004-08-27 15:10 ` Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code Patrick Gefre ` (4 preceding siblings ...) 2004-08-27 15:54 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-27 17:15 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-29 6:39 ` Keith Owens 2004-08-29 7:22 ` Keith Owens 7 siblings, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-27 17:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Patrick Gefre; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 10:10:01AM -0500, Patrick Gefre wrote: > > This is an update to our last set of patches. I've added some comments from the > last review and another synopsis of the patches. The individual patches will > follow this email. The header changes in your patchkit are still rather strange, you're e.g. adding a pfn_t or clusterid_t but never using it. As suggested in a previous mail please also provide a clean set of headers in addition to the clean set of source files. There's lots of dead wood in thos and with all the code gone youshould be able to kill off all the IRIX-compat gunk, etc.. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code 2004-08-27 15:10 ` Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code Patrick Gefre ` (5 preceding siblings ...) 2004-08-27 17:15 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-29 6:39 ` Keith Owens 2004-08-29 7:16 ` Sam Ravnborg 2004-08-29 7:22 ` Keith Owens 7 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Keith Owens @ 2004-08-29 6:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: Patrick Gefre, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 17:21:31 +0100, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote: >all files: lots of missing statics, try running >http://samba.org/ftp/unpacked/junkcode/findstatic.pl over the compiled code. ftp://ftp.ocs.com.au/pub/namespace.pl does a more rigorous check for symbols that can be static. namespace.pl knows about the special kernel symbols, linkage and EXPORT_SYMBOL(). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code 2004-08-29 6:39 ` Keith Owens @ 2004-08-29 7:16 ` Sam Ravnborg 0 siblings, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Sam Ravnborg @ 2004-08-29 7:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Keith Owens; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, Patrick Gefre, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 04:39:34PM +1000, Keith Owens wrote: > On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 17:21:31 +0100, > Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote: > >all files: lots of missing statics, try running > >http://samba.org/ftp/unpacked/junkcode/findstatic.pl over the compiled code. > > ftp://ftp.ocs.com.au/pub/namespace.pl does a more rigorous check for > symbols that can be static. namespace.pl knows about the special > kernel symbols, linkage and EXPORT_SYMBOL(). Should we add it to the support scripts in the kernel? Something like: make checknamespace Sam ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code 2004-08-27 15:10 ` Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code Patrick Gefre ` (6 preceding siblings ...) 2004-08-29 6:39 ` Keith Owens @ 2004-08-29 7:22 ` Keith Owens 7 siblings, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Keith Owens @ 2004-08-29 7:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sam Ravnborg; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, Patrick Gefre, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 09:16:35 +0200, Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> wrote: >On Sun, Aug 29, 2004 at 04:39:34PM +1000, Keith Owens wrote: >> On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 17:21:31 +0100, >> Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote: >> >all files: lots of missing statics, try running >> >http://samba.org/ftp/unpacked/junkcode/findstatic.pl over the compiled code. >> >> ftp://ftp.ocs.com.au/pub/namespace.pl does a more rigorous check for >> symbols that can be static. namespace.pl knows about the special >> kernel symbols, linkage and EXPORT_SYMBOL(). > >Should we add it to the support scripts in the kernel? >Something like: > >make checknamespace Funny about that ... I was making a patch to send to you and akpm when your mail arrived. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Altix I/O code reorganization 2004-08-04 20:14 Altix I/O code reorganization Pat Gefre ` (3 preceding siblings ...) 2004-08-06 13:18 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-06 13:51 ` Keith Owens 2004-08-06 13:55 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-06 15:47 ` Russ Anderson 5 siblings, 1 reply; 36+ messages in thread From: Keith Owens @ 2004-08-06 13:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: Pat Gefre, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Fri, 6 Aug 2004 14:18:36 +0100, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote: >008-kdb-support-funtions: > kdb isn't in mainline, please add the two files to the kdb patch instead No. We have had this discussion before - kdb is an extensible debugger. Subsystems can add their own kdb commands to decode their own data. Those extensions to kdb belong in the subsystem code, not in the main kdb patch. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Altix I/O code reorganization 2004-08-06 13:51 ` Altix I/O code reorganization Keith Owens @ 2004-08-06 13:55 ` Christoph Hellwig 0 siblings, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-08-06 13:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Keith Owens; +Cc: Pat Gefre, linux-ia64, linux-kernel On Fri, Aug 06, 2004 at 11:51:54PM +1000, Keith Owens wrote: > No. We have had this discussion before - kdb is an extensible > debugger. Subsystems can add their own kdb commands to decode their > own data. Those extensions to kdb belong in the subsystem code, not in > the main kdb patch. They do not belong into mainline. kdb isn't in mainline and we shouldn't carry code for it around. I don't care whether you want it in the kdb patch or whatether it's in a separate one. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
* Re: Altix I/O code reorganization 2004-08-04 20:14 Altix I/O code reorganization Pat Gefre ` (4 preceding siblings ...) 2004-08-06 13:51 ` Altix I/O code reorganization Keith Owens @ 2004-08-06 15:47 ` Russ Anderson 5 siblings, 0 replies; 36+ messages in thread From: Russ Anderson @ 2004-08-06 15:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: Pat Gefre, linux-ia64, linux-kernel Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > 006-bte: > Please merge bte_error.c into the existing bte.c bte_crb_error_handler() is called from hubiio_crb_error_handler() in arch/ia64/sn/io/sn2/shuberror.c. That's why bte_error.c is in the same directory as shuberror.c (and not in arch/ia64/sn/kernel with bte.c). If bte_error.c is merged, wouldn't it make more sense to merge it with shuberror.c? Thanks, -- Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc rja@sgi.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 36+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-09-07 22:16 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 36+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2004-08-04 20:14 Altix I/O code reorganization Pat Gefre 2004-08-05 0:31 ` Grant Grundler 2004-08-05 18:16 ` Greg KH 2004-08-05 20:51 ` Pat Gefre 2004-08-05 21:08 ` Greg KH 2004-08-05 21:32 ` Jesse Barnes 2004-08-05 21:36 ` Greg KH 2004-08-06 13:18 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-06 16:19 ` Jesse Barnes 2004-08-07 10:58 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-11 23:24 ` Patrick Gefre 2004-08-12 9:15 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-12 14:47 ` Jesse Barnes 2004-08-12 15:21 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-27 15:10 ` Latest Altix I/O code reorganization code Patrick Gefre 2004-08-27 15:14 ` Patrick Gefre 2004-08-27 15:21 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-27 15:35 ` Patrick Gefre 2004-08-27 15:44 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-27 15:23 ` Pat Gefre 2004-08-27 15:36 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-27 15:45 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-27 16:32 ` Patrick Gefre 2004-08-27 15:54 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-27 16:06 ` Patrick Gefre 2004-08-27 16:21 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-09-03 23:40 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-09-07 22:10 ` Patrick Gefre 2004-09-07 22:16 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-27 17:15 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-29 6:39 ` Keith Owens 2004-08-29 7:16 ` Sam Ravnborg 2004-08-29 7:22 ` Keith Owens 2004-08-06 13:51 ` Altix I/O code reorganization Keith Owens 2004-08-06 13:55 ` Christoph Hellwig 2004-08-06 15:47 ` Russ Anderson
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox