From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F7EBDDEDB for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 03:30:46 +1100 (EST) Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:29:42 -0600 From: Matt Porter To: Zhang Wei Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] Add multi mport support. Message-ID: <20080205162942.GB20177@gate.crashing.org> References: <1201689053956-git-send-email-wei.zhang@freescale.com> <12016890621727-git-send-email-wei.zhang@freescale.com> <120168907160-git-send-email-wei.zhang@freescale.com> <12016890773706-git-send-email-wei.zhang@freescale.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 02:30:13PM +0800, Zhang Wei wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Kumar Gala [mailto:galak@kernel.crashing.org] > > when we have multiple ports are the device IDs on the ports intended > > to be unique only to a port or unique across all ports? > > > I consider each RIO controller will has its own network, the device IDs > should be > unique only in its port network. This is a bad assumption IMHO. It pushes policy on to the system designer of a RapidIO network. It is very possible to use multiple controllers as entry points in a single RapidIO network fabric space. The reason one would do this is to provide optimized paths to some endpoints in the system. If possible, there should never be a policy assumption like this in kernel space. It's much better to assume that one may or may not have a unique id space. -Matt