From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: Christoph Raisch <RAISCH@de.ibm.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, Jan-Bernd Themann <THEMANN@de.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Nathan Lynch <ntl@pobox.com>,
ossthema@linux.vnet.ibm.com, sam@ravnborg.org,
Sudhir Kumar <skumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Joachim Fenkes <FENKES@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [2.6.24-rc6-mm1]Build failure in drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 14:17:12 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080207221712.GC19310@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <OFB2A9433F.35E00CA4-ONC12573DF.0049FB58-C12573DF.005988BA@de.ibm.com>
On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 03:20:20PM +0100, Christoph Raisch wrote:
> Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote on 29.01.2008 14:23:09:
>
> > On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 11:12:40AM +0100, Jan-Bernd Themann wrote:
> ...
> > > The sym-link is not gereated automatically as the device for portX is
> added
> > > to the eHEA device (as subnode) where the eHEA device is not a bus.
> >
> > Then please fix that, no other driver has this kind of problem, right?
> > Are you just passing the wrong "device" to the networking subsystem?
> >
> > > If this sym-link is of interest (which I guess is the case as most
> devices
> > > have it) we have to create it somehow.
> >
> > Why would you have to do this by hand? What makes this driver so unique
> > in the kernel that it would have to do this? We have lots of other
> > multi-port ethernet drivers today without this issue, right?
> >
> > confused,
> >
> > greg k-h
>
> well, the major difference is hea is not PCI.
What is it? It has to live on some kind of bus, right?
> All PCI cards we checked have a 1:1 relationship between PCI function (PCI
> config space) and a single ethernet port.
> Even if the same Ethernet chip has two ports, it shows up as two separate
> adapters from the PCI perspective (two PCI entries in /sys/bus/pci/devices
>
> host:/ # ls -l /sys/bus/pci/devices/0000\:c8\:01.0/
> total 0
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2008-01-28 14:59 bus -> ../../../../bus/pci
> -r--r--r-- 1 root root 4096 2008-01-28 14:59 class
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 256 2008-01-28 14:59 config
> -r--r--r-- 1 root root 4096 2008-01-28 14:59 device
> -r--r--r-- 1 root root 4096 2008-01-29 14:26 devspec
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2008-01-28 14:59 driver ->
> ../../../../bus/pci/drivers/e1000
> -r--r--r-- 1 root root 4096 2008-01-28 14:59 irq
> -r--r--r-- 1 root root 4096 2008-01-29 14:26 local_cpus
> -r--r--r-- 1 root root 4096 2008-01-28 14:59 modalias
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2008-01-29 14:26 net:eth1 ->
> ../../../../class/net/eth1
> -r--r--r-- 1 root root 4096 2008-01-28 14:59 resource
> ....
> host:/ # ls -l /sys/bus/pci/devices/0000\:c8\:01.1/
> total 0
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2008-01-28 14:59 bus -> ../../../../bus/pci
> -r--r--r-- 1 root root 4096 2008-01-28 14:59 class
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 256 2008-01-28 14:59 config
> -r--r--r-- 1 root root 4096 2008-01-28 14:59 device
> -r--r--r-- 1 root root 4096 2008-01-29 14:29 devspec
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2008-01-28 14:59 driver ->
> ../../../../bus/pci/drivers/e1000
> -r--r--r-- 1 root root 4096 2008-01-28 14:59 irq
> -r--r--r-- 1 root root 4096 2008-01-29 14:29 local_cpus
> -r--r--r-- 1 root root 4096 2008-01-28 14:59 modalias
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 2008-01-29 14:29 net:eth2 ->
> ../../../../class/net/eth2
> ...
>
> These pci functions corresponds to a
> /sys/bus/ibmebus/devices/789D.001.XXXXXX-P1/port0
> and
> /sys/bus/ibmebus/devices/789D.001.XXXXXX-P1/port1
>
> The busdriver currently does not find out, how many ports are in a
> /sys/bus/ibmebus/devices/789D.001.XXXXXX-P1.
> This is up to the hardware specific driver responsible for ehea or ehca.
> Think of a PCI card where the PCI busdriver
> can not determine how many ports are implemented on the card.
>
> How should this be mapped to /sys ?
>
> Should we try to "flatten" the ports to something like
> /sys/bus/ibmebus/devices/789D.001.XXXXXX-P1
> /sys/bus/ibmebus/devices/789D.001.XXXXXX-P1_port0
> /sys/bus/ibmebus/devices/789D.001.XXXXXX-P1_port1
> ...which means physical hierarchy information would look a bit strange,
> but could be the simpler one.
No. Why have a separate "port" device for every ethernet port? What
keeps you from just creating the different network devices for your
device, and pointing the parent to the same 789D.001.XXXXXX-P1 device?
Lots of PCI devices hang "class devices" off of them all the time, why
would this be any different from that?
I think you all are trying to make this more complex than it really is
:)
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-02-07 22:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-01-08 16:33 [2.6.24-rc6-mm1]Build failure in drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c Sudhir Kumar
2008-01-10 17:34 ` Greg KH
2008-01-18 9:16 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2008-01-25 19:10 ` Nathan Lynch
2008-01-28 18:21 ` Greg KH
2008-01-28 18:24 ` Greg KH
2008-01-28 19:22 ` Nathan Lynch
2008-01-28 19:54 ` Greg KH
2008-01-29 10:12 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2008-01-29 13:23 ` Greg KH
2008-01-29 14:20 ` Christoph Raisch
2008-02-01 14:37 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2008-02-07 22:17 ` Greg KH [this message]
2008-02-12 15:28 ` Christoph Raisch
2008-01-28 18:25 ` Greg KH
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080207221712.GC19310@kroah.com \
--to=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=FENKES@de.ibm.com \
--cc=RAISCH@de.ibm.com \
--cc=THEMANN@de.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ntl@pobox.com \
--cc=ossthema@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
--cc=skumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox