Re: RFC: Changes for PCI

[Tom Gall <tom_gall@vnet.ibm.com>]

"David S. Miller" wrote:

> Looks, ppc64 is really still experimental right?

Heck no.

> Which means it is
> 2.5.x material, and 2.5.x has been quoted as being a week or two away.

I sure hope that ppc64 is NOT considered 2.5.x material.

> So we can solve this problem for real, with system bus domains, and
> get ppc64 working all within the framework of 2.5.x which is just
> around the corner.

A real solution would be nice. And if the real solution can ONLY be in 2.5, then
is it such a bad idea moving the bus number type to unsigned int for 2.4.x?

> For now, I am rather sure your systems for testing have < 256 physical
> PCI busses and you can for 2.4.x use the remapping scheme sparc64 uses.

Wellll, remember that post about more than 256 PCI buses? I meant it.

Regards,

Tom
--
Tom Gall - PPC64 Maintainer      "Where's the ka-boom? There was
Linux Technology Center           supposed to be an earth
(w) tom_gall@vnet.ibm.com         shattering ka-boom!"
(w) 507-253-4558                 -- Marvin Martian
(h) tgall@rochcivictheatre.org
http://www.ibm.com/linux/ltc/projects/ppc