On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 02:25:49PM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 12:37:07PM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote:
On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 03:07:34PM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:
Please reorder PATCH[6] with this one because the EEH device is expected
to be created before EEH PE.
That's a good
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 04:28:23PM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote:
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 02:25:49PM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 12:37:07PM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote:
On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 03:07:34PM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:
Please reorder PATCH[6] with this one because the EEH device
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 12:37:07PM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote:
On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 03:07:34PM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:
Please reorder PATCH[6] with this one because the EEH device is expected
to be created before EEH PE.
That's a good idea.
On powernv platform, VF PE is a special PE which is
On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 03:07:34PM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:
Please reorder PATCH[6] with this one because the EEH device is expected
to be created before EEH PE.
On powernv platform, VF PE is a special PE which is different from the Bus
PE. On the EEH side, it needs a corresponding concept to
On powernv platform, VF PE is a special PE which is different from the Bus
PE. On the EEH side, it needs a corresponding concept to handle the VF PE
properly. For example, we need to create VF PE when VF's pci_dev is
initialized in kernel. And add a flag to mark it is a VF PF.
This patch
