From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Glauber Costa <gcosta@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Fix CONFIG_PCI=n compile failure
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 08:13:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081029081347.63048b8d@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1225289883.3257.9.camel@localhost.localdomain>
On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 09:18:03 -0500
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 07:08 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 09:01:46 -0500
> > James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> wrote:
> >
> > > This is obviously some strange definition of the word "right" of
> > > which I was previously unaware. That patch moves forbid_dac plus
> > > a load of quirk processing (also for a PCI bus) out from under
> > > CONFIG_PCI only ... which will fix the compile error, sure.
> > >
> > > However, if you'd be so kind, please explain how a DAC (meaning
> > > Dual Addressing Cycle on the PCI bus) is useful (or even can be
> > > effected) without a PCI bus?
> > >
> > > All its really doing is contaminating pci-dma.c with clutter that
> > > only needs to be there because someone can't get the separation
> > > right.o
> > >
> >
> > why do you even want that file for CONFIG_PCI=n ??
>
> Um, my fault from long ago. It's contaminated with the dma_ API
> pieces that are bus generic.
>
> The correct solution, I think, is to split it out into a bus generic
> piece and a PCI specific piece.
agreed
> I think all the intel/amd IOMMU stuff
> should be in the PCI specific piece ... although I know there's a
> theoretical case where the AMD iommu can be ht bus only with no PCI
> bus, I don't think anyone's built such a beast, in which case it's
> safe to condition iommu presence on CONFIG_PCI?
I would think that's not relevant; AMD seems to have PCI in it's cpu
package already, never mind what it is connected to.
--
Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-29 15:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-28 21:22 James Bottomley
2008-10-28 22:41 ` FUJITA Tomonori
2008-10-29 7:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-29 14:01 ` James Bottomley
2008-10-29 14:08 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-10-29 14:18 ` James Bottomley
2008-10-29 15:13 ` Arjan van de Ven [this message]
2008-10-30 20:13 ` [PATCH] x86 separate PCI out from DMA operations James Bottomley
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=20081029081347.63048b8d@infradead.org \
--to=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=gcosta@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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
Powered by JetHome