From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753662AbaEHPVN (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 May 2014 11:21:13 -0400 Received: from mail-bn1blp0186.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([207.46.163.186]:20049 "EHLO na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751501AbaEHPVL (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 May 2014 11:21:11 -0400 X-WSS-ID: 0N59HB6-08-0BF-02 X-M-MSG: Message-ID: <536BA0E3.4050709@amd.com> Date: Thu, 8 May 2014 10:21:07 -0500 From: Suravee Suthikulanit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Richter CC: , , , Aravind Gopalakrishnan , Borislav Petkov , "Daniel J Blueman" , Andreas Herrmann , Myron Stowe Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/3] x86/PCI: Fix PCI root numa_node info on AMD family15h References: <1399489127-6961-1-git-send-email-suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com> <1399489127-6961-2-git-send-email-suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com> <20140508085905.GK32718@rric.localhost> <20140508090148.GL32718@rric.localhost> <536B973B.2000207@amd.com> <20140508151402.GN32718@rric.localhost> In-Reply-To: <20140508151402.GN32718@rric.localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:165.204.84.222;CTRY:US;IPV:NLI;IPV:NLI;EFV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10009001)(6009001)(428001)(479174003)(377454003)(189002)(199002)(51704005)(24454002)(79102001)(80022001)(65806001)(47776003)(20776003)(64706001)(65956001)(74662001)(74502001)(31966008)(83506001)(84676001)(36756003)(21056001)(33656001)(50466002)(81542001)(44976005)(68736004)(19580405001)(19580395003)(83322001)(76482001)(83072002)(64126003)(65816999)(85852003)(59896001)(77982001)(92726001)(23756003)(99396002)(46102001)(92566001)(86362001)(101416001)(54356999)(4396001)(76176999)(81342001)(50986999)(87266999)(77096999)(2009001)(97736001)(87936001);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101;SCL:1;SRVR:BLUPR02MB115;H:atltwp02.amd.com;FPR:;MLV:sfv;PTR:InfoDomainNonexistent;MX:1;A:1;LANG:en; X-Forefront-PRVS: 0205EDCD76 Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is 165.204.84.222) smtp.mailfrom=Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com; X-OriginatorOrg: amd4.onmicrosoft.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 5/8/2014 10:14 AM, Robert Richter wrote: > On 08.05.14 09:39:55, Suravee Suthikulanit wrote: >> On 5/8/2014 4:01 AM, Robert Richter wrote: >>> On 08.05.14 10:59:05, Robert Richter wrote: >>>> On 07.05.14 13:58:45, suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com wrote: >>>>> @@ -113,10 +122,17 @@ static int __init early_fill_mp_bus_info(void) >>>>> info = alloc_pci_root_info(min_bus, max_bus, node, link); >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> + /* >>>>> + * The following code is only supported until Fam11h. >>>>> + * Newer processors will depend on ACPI MCFG table instead. >>>>> + */ >>>>> + if (boot_cpu_data.x86 > 0x11) >>>>> + return 0; >>>>> + >>>>> /* get the default node and link for left over res */ >>>> >>>> As this is the only substantial change of your patch, I would better >>>> drop ther rest or at least split it in two patches. Should this change >>>> also be for stable? >>> >>> Of course adding the hostbridge must be also part of the patch, didn't >>> note this due to the other noise. See why the split would be good? >>> >>>> >>>> -Robert >> >> >> Robert, >> >> I have already added the hostbridge for family15h in this patch. >> >> +static struct amd_hostbridge hb_probes[] __initdata = { >> + { 0, 0x18, 0x1100 }, /* K8 */ >> + { 0, 0x18, 0x1200 }, /* Family10h */ >> + { 0xff, 0, 0x1200 }, /* Family10h */ >> + { 0, 0x18, 0x1300 }, /* Family11h */ >> + { 0, 0x18, 0x1600 }, /* Family15h */ <--- HERE > > Yes, I noticed that, but later, thus my 2nd mail. > >> }; >> >> The rest of the changes are mostly comments, some minor renaming of >> variables for clarity, and replace hardcode values with preprocessor macro. >> If needed, I can split them. > > I just would drop it, you just need the fam15h device and the cpu mode > check. > > -Robert > The reason I put it all these comments here is because it took us a while to discuss what to do with this file going forward. There were some confusions. Therefore, I just want to document it here. Also, the check for (boot_cpu_data.x86 > 0x11) was needed because it should not be done for family15h. Suravee