From: Patrick Mochel <mochel@osdl.org>
To: Matthew Dobson <colpatch@us.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [rfc][patch] driverfs multi-node(board) patch [2/2]
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 14:34:42 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0210031428280.1871-100000@cherise.pdx.osdl.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3D98F450.8080003@us.ibm.com>
Ok, I'm finally getting back to you..
> Ok.. here are the real changes. I'd really like to get some feedback on
> what you (or anyone else) thinks of these proposed changes. This sets
> up a generic topology initialization routine which should discover all
> online nodes (boards), CPUs, and Memory Blocks at boot time. It also
> makes the CPUs and memblks it discovers children of the appropriate nodes.
You didn't append the patch, which is annoying, but I'll deal..
The main problem I have is the code placement. I put the CPU stuff under
arch/ because I anticpate wrapping the cpu structure with an arch-specific
one, so you can ascertain arch-specific information via the generic
structure. Moving it out of arch/ precludes that from happening (easily).
Ditto for memblks, though I'm not really sure what other info you'd want
in the structures.
Ditto+ for nodes, or boards. Those are definitely arch-specific
structures, and shouldn't be in drivers/base/. On top of that, I don't
think their registration should all be munged together in one file. Maybe
they should be, in their own play area (under arch/i386/mach-ccnuma/).
-pat
prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-10-03 21:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-10-01 1:00 [rfc][patch] driverfs multi-node(board) patch [1/2] Matthew Dobson
2002-10-01 1:03 ` [rfc][patch] driverfs multi-node(board) patch [2/2] Matthew Dobson
2002-10-01 5:41 ` Greg KH
2002-10-01 18:19 ` Matthew Dobson
2002-10-01 18:28 ` Patrick Mochel
2002-10-01 18:44 ` Matthew Dobson
2002-10-01 18:54 ` Patrick Mochel
2002-10-03 21:34 ` Patrick Mochel [this message]
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=Pine.LNX.4.44.0210031428280.1871-100000@cherise.pdx.osdl.net \
--to=mochel@osdl.org \
--cc=colpatch@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).