Re: [PATCH 0/6] MSI portability cleanups

[Jeff Garzik]

Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > The only architecture problem that isn't solvable in this context is
> > the problem of supporting the crazy hypervisor on the ppc RTAS, which
> > asks us to drive the hardware but does not give us access to the
> > hardware registers.
>
> So you are saying that we should use your model while admitting that it
> can't solve our problems...
>
> I really don't understand why you seem so totally opposed to Michael's
> approach which definitely looks to me like the sane thing to do. Note
> that in the end, Michael's approach isn't -that- different from yours,
> just a bit more abstracted.


I think the high-level ops approach makes more sense.  It's more future 
proof, in addition to covering all existing implementations.

	Jeff


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/