From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932398Ab0EXXwO (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 May 2010 19:52:14 -0400 Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.149]:41827 "EHLO e31.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932103Ab0EXXwN convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 May 2010 19:52:13 -0400 Message-ID: <20100524195200.etvygryty8g0gswc@imap.linux.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 19:52:00 -0400 From: Corinna Schultz To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: mingo@elte.hu, djwong@linux.vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] calgary: Increase the maximum PHB bus number MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; DelSp=Yes format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.3) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Apr 06, 2010, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 10:37:50AM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 11:03:46AM +0200, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 04:59:01PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > > > > -#define MAX_NUM_OF_PHBS 8 /* how many PHBs in total? */ > > > > -#define MAX_NUM_CHASSIS 8 /* max number of chassis */ > > > > -/* MAX_PHB_BUS_NUM is the maximal possible dev->bus->number */ > > > > -#define MAX_PHB_BUS_NUM (MAX_NUM_OF_PHBS * MAX_NUM_CHASSIS * 2) > > > > +/* > > > > + The maximum PHB bus number. > > > > + x3950M2 (rare): 8 chassis, 48 PHBs per chassis = 384 > > > > + x3950M2: 4 chassis, 48 PHBs per chassis = 192 > > > > + x3950 (PCIE): 8 chassis, 32 PHBs per chassis = 256 > > > > + x3950 (PCIX): 8 chassis, 16 PHBs per chassis = 128 > > > > +*/ > > > > +#define MAX_PHB_BUS_NUM 384 > > > > + > > > > #define PHBS_PER_CALGARY 4 > > > > > We'll end up wasting a few bytes on small systems, but I don't think > > > it's enough to matter on these fairly large systems. As far as I'm > > > concerned, patch is fine. > > > > > Acked-by: Muli Ben-Yehuda > > > Hmm... has this patch been queued up by anyone for the .34 merge > > window? > Still not in 2.6.34-rc3. Are there any objections to this patch? I've not > heard any complaints since my original posting... or did it simply > get lost in > the noise? This patch still hasn't been picked up by a maintainer. Are there any objections? -Corinna Schultz IBM LTC