Re: [PATCH 2.6.23] ibmebus: Prevent bus_id collisions

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Joachim Fenkes <fenkes@...>
Cc: LinuxPPC-Dev <linuxppc-dev@...>, LKML <linux-kernel@...>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...>, Thomas Klein <tklein@...>, Jan-Bernd Themann <themann@...>, Christoph Raisch <raisch@...>, Stefan Roscher <stefan.roscher@...>
Date: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 - 2:12 pm

Hi-

Joachim Fenkes wrote:

This is a userspace-visible change, but I guess it's unavoidable.
Will anything break?

Also, I dislike this approach of duplicating the firmware device tree
path in sysfs.  Are GX/ibmebus devices guaranteed to be children of
the same node in the OF device tree?  If so, their unit addresses will
be unique, and therefore suitable values for bus_id.  I believe this
is what the powerpc vio bus code does.

-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH 2.6.23] ibmebus: Prevent bus_id collisions, Joachim Fenkes, (Wed Aug 29, 12:15 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2.6.23] ibmebus: Prevent bus_id collisions, Arnd Bergmann, (Thu Aug 30, 2:22 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2.6.23] ibmebus: Prevent bus_id collisions, Joachim Fenkes, (Fri Aug 31, 10:34 am)
Re: [PATCH 2.6.23] ibmebus: Prevent bus_id collisions, Arnd Bergmann, (Fri Aug 31, 1:08 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2.6.23] ibmebus: Prevent bus_id collisions, Joachim Fenkes, (Fri Aug 31, 1:46 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2.6.23] ibmebus: Prevent bus_id collisions, Joachim Fenkes, (Thu Aug 30, 10:00 am)
Re: [PATCH 2.6.23] ibmebus: Prevent bus_id collisions, Linas Vepstas, (Thu Aug 30, 5:28 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2.6.23] ibmebus: Prevent bus_id collisions, Joachim Fenkes, (Fri Aug 31, 4:57 am)
Re: [PATCH 2.6.23] ibmebus: Prevent bus_id collisions, Joel Schopp, (Thu Aug 30, 4:36 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2.6.23] ibmebus: Prevent bus_id collisions, Nathan Lynch, (Thu Aug 30, 1:56 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2.6.23] ibmebus: Prevent bus_id collisions, Nathan Lynch, (Wed Aug 29, 2:12 pm)