From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757263AbYIIEPl (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Sep 2008 00:15:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756658AbYIIEMm (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Sep 2008 00:12:42 -0400 Received: from outbound-mail-115.bluehost.com ([69.89.24.5]:34159 "HELO outbound-mail-115.bluehost.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1756652AbYIIEMl (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Sep 2008 00:12:41 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=virtuousgeek.org; h=Received:From:To:Subject:Date:User-Agent:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Disposition:Message-Id:X-Identified-User; b=jF+6xy6tG60SZvxXmbtC24itSS2dkS3PHGcncrc5O+uP2o/SluZBsTfij+P/S+KtpsLsxvjcwBu+eooAym9aknu21r8iXDPkSu1laPJkDenZ2mjCMPWo32H/mF5sX1GS; From: Jesse Barnes To: Alex Chiang Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI Hotplug: fakephp: fix deadlock... again Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 21:12:29 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 Cc: Matthew Wilcox , "Zhao, Yu" , Greg KH , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20080821201918.GA24411@ldl.fc.hp.com> <20080902000951.GM1239@parisc-linux.org> <20080902001905.GB14492@ldl.fc.hp.com> In-Reply-To: <20080902001905.GB14492@ldl.fc.hp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200809082112.30457.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> X-Identified-User: {642:box128.bluehost.com:virtuous:virtuousgeek.org} {sentby:smtp auth 12.108.5.2 authed with jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org} Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Monday, September 01, 2008 5:19 pm Alex Chiang wrote: > * Matthew Wilcox : > > On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 12:40:18PM -0600, Alex Chiang wrote: > > > We get the "slot already scheduled for removal" because that > > > particular device has 2 functions, and we're creating slots > > > on a per-slot basis now, not a per-function basis. > > > > > > Although, I wonder, Willy -- is that really the right thing > > > to do? Seems like fakephp would be more useful if we did > > > operate on a per-function basis, and not per-slot. Especially > > > given Yu's work with SR-IOV, where we can apparently have > > > lots of functions per a physical device. > > > > I suspect it depends on what you believe the point of fakephp > > is. > > Ok, this was all developed before I started working in this area, > or Linux, even. ;) > > > My assumption was that it was a way to fake what would happen > > if you had a hotplug controller for a particular slot. In that > > context, the change I made was clearly correct. If you want to > > use it for hot-removing individual functions from a Linux guest > > running under a hypervisor (for example), that's much less > > useful. > > Sure, that sounds reasonable. > > In that case, my patch should fix the stupid regression I > introduced, but if others think that fakephp would be more useful > for hot-removing functions, I wouldn't object to reverting the > original patch. I don't have a preference here; whatever is most useful for people is probably what we should go for. Zhao? Thanks, Jesse