From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from edu-smtp-01.edutel.nl (edu-smtp-01.edutel.nl [88.159.1.175]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94013B70DA for ; Fri, 22 Oct 2010 08:16:07 +1100 (EST) Message-ID: <4CC0AD74.8070800@neli.hopto.org> Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 23:15:32 +0200 From: Micha Nelissen MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexandre Bounine Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 0/2] RapidIO: Changes to handling of RIO switches References: <1287688250-14226-1-git-send-email-alexandre.bounine@idt.com> In-Reply-To: <1287688250-14226-1-git-send-email-alexandre.bounine@idt.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Moll , akpm@linux-foundation.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Alexandre Bounine wrote: > 1. Using one storage location common for switches and endpoints eliminates > unnecessary device type checks during maintenance access operations. > While destination IDs and hop counts have different meaning for endpoints and > switches, this does not prevent us from storing them in the primary RIO device > structure (rio_dev) for both types. How can you say this? The two variables have different meanings, this logically implies you can't merge them. So how do you say 'this does not prevent us from ...' without providing a reason? > 2. Convert RIO switch device structures (rio_dev + rio_switch) into single > allocation unit. This change is based on the fact that RIO switches are using > common RIO device objects anyway. Allocating RIO switch objects as RIO devices > with added space for switch information simplifies handling of RIO switch device > objects. I still don't think that's a good idea because the rdev->rswitch pointer can be defined to point to the switch that a given rio_dev is connected to. This is useful for quick lookups. How else can to know to which switch a given device is connected? Micha