From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from yw-out-2324.google.com (yw-out-2324.google.com [74.125.46.28]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34F76DE19A for ; Wed, 20 May 2009 13:17:30 +1000 (EST) Received: by yw-out-2324.google.com with SMTP id 2so115046ywt.39 for ; Tue, 19 May 2009 20:17:28 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1242788522.16901.134.camel@pasglop> References: <20090519162511.7454D17E8058@mail19-dub.bigfish.com> <1242788522.16901.134.camel@pasglop> From: Grant Likely Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 21:17:08 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Musings on PCI busses To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: linuxppc-dev , Roderick Colenbrander , John Linn List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 9:02 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Tue, 2009-05-19 at 09:25 -0700, Stephen Neuendorffer wrote: > >> I agree that something is called for... =A0The first might be slightly >> simpler, since it would probably transparently deal with the presence >> of more than one PLB->PCI bridge? > > The current code doesn't already ? Current code doesn't exist in mainline. :-) And, no, the patch Roderick wrote doesn't handle more than one PHB. No reason it couldn't though. g. --=20 Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.