On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 03:25:55PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 05:26:33PM -0700, Jon Mason wrote:
> > +struct ntb_transport_qp;
> > +
> > +struct ntb_client {
> > + char *name;
> > + int (*probe) (struct pci_dev *pdev);
> > + void (*remove) (struct pci_dev *pdev);
> > +};
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 02:02:25PM -0400, chetan loke wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Jon Mason wrote:
> >
> > I don't see the benefit of having the driver in staging. Any vendors
> > who would notice the ntb driver in staging would be sitting on these
> > mailing lists and hopefully ha
On Jul 31, 2012, at 7:10 PM, "Jianbin Kang" wrote:
>> Actually this is what I'm working on now, using async_tx to replace the
>> memcpy. I believe the changes shouldn't be that significant.
>>
>> Is the "hardware that can setup dma" you refer to something that does
>> not use this interface?
>
> Actually this is what I'm working on now, using async_tx to replace the
> memcpy. I believe the changes shouldn't be that significant.
>
> Is the "hardware that can setup dma" you refer to something that does
> not use this interface?
>
Yes, they use this interface, but split 'memcpy_toio' to t
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 03:51:05PM -0700, Jon Mason wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 03:23:38PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 05:26:33PM -0700, Jon Mason wrote:
> > > + * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
> > > + * along with this program; if
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 03:23:38PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 05:26:33PM -0700, Jon Mason wrote:
> > + * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
> > + * along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
> > + * Foundation, Inc., 51 Fran
On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 05:26:33PM -0700, Jon Mason wrote:
> +struct ntb_transport_qp;
> +
> +struct ntb_client {
> + char *name;
> + int (*probe) (struct pci_dev *pdev);
> + void (*remove) (struct pci_dev *pdev);
> +};
Why isn't this tied into the driver model? That looks like you re
On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 05:26:33PM -0700, Jon Mason wrote:
> + * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
> + * along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
> + * Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin St - Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301
> USA.
You really
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Jon Mason wrote:
>
> I don't see the benefit of having the driver in staging. Any vendors
> who would notice the ntb driver in staging would be sitting on these
> mailing lists and hopefully have planety of comments on the design.
> Stashing the driver in staging
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 12:02:20PM -0400, chetan loke wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Jon Mason wrote:
> >>
> >> I've tried to make it all generic enough that non-Intel NTBs should plug
> >> in with
> >> minimal changes to ntb_
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 07:45:29AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Jon Mason wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:50:13AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >> On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 6:26 PM, Jon Mason wrote:
> >> > A PCI-Express non-transparent bridge (NTB) is a poin
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:02 AM, chetan loke wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Jon Mason wrote:
>>>
>>> I've tried to make it all generic enough that non-Intel NTBs should plug in
>>> with
>>> minimal changes to ntb_hw.c. If th
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 11:35:33AM +0800, Jianbin Kang wrote:
> > I've tried to make it all generic enough that non-Intel NTBs should plug in
> > with
> > minimal changes to ntb_hw.c. If their design is too divergent, then a
> > slight
> > redesign of ntb_hw.c might be necessary. But from what
On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 8:26 PM, Jon Mason wrote:
> +static void ntb_tx_copy_task(struct ntb_transport_qp *qp,
> +struct ntb_queue_entry *entry,
> +void *offset)
> +{
> + struct ntb_payload_header *hdr = offset;
> +
> + offset
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Jon Mason wrote:
>>
>> I've tried to make it all generic enough that non-Intel NTBs should plug in
>> with
>> minimal changes to ntb_hw.c. If their design is too divergent, then a slight
>> redesign of ntb
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Jon Mason wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:50:13AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 6:26 PM, Jon Mason wrote:
>> > A PCI-Express non-transparent bridge (NTB) is a point-to-point PCIe bus
>> > connecting 2 systems, providing electrical iso
> I've tried to make it all generic enough that non-Intel NTBs should plug in
> with
> minimal changes to ntb_hw.c. If their design is too divergent, then a slight
> redesign of ntb_hw.c might be necessary. But from what I've seen of other
> designs on the internet, they appear to be extremely s
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:50:13AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 6:26 PM, Jon Mason wrote:
> > A PCI-Express non-transparent bridge (NTB) is a point-to-point PCIe bus
> > connecting 2 systems, providing electrical isolation between the two
> > subsystems.
> > A non-transpa
On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 6:26 PM, Jon Mason wrote:
> A PCI-Express non-transparent bridge (NTB) is a point-to-point PCIe bus
> connecting 2 systems, providing electrical isolation between the two
> subsystems.
> A non-transparent bridge is functionally similar to a transparent bridge
> except
> t
19 matches
Mail list logo
