Re: [patch 0/8] x86: UV - XPC fixes with related supportfunctionality V2.

[Ingo Molnar]

* Robin Holt <holt@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> > Regarding the patches - i still very much dislike how the code 
> > interfaces to the 'BIOS'. The drivers/misc/sgi-xp/ code looks rather 
> > messy.
> > 
> > Why isnt a pure hardware interface exposed, as both hpa and me 
> > suggested in the past?
> 
> The information is stored on hardware (UV-Hub and RAM) outside this 
> instance of hardware.
> 
> The only safe way to access that hardware is via the GRU.
> 
> No GRU resources are available to the BIOS.
> 
> Ergo, this interface method with multiple passes is needed.
> 
> If there is a better way, I am open to suggestions.

Erm, the better way is to not use the BIOS but to access those registers 
that the BIOS accesses? (which is currently hidden by the BIOS)

In other words, we want to remove arch/x86/kernel/bios_uv.c and the 
uv_bios_call*() APIs and replace them via clear implementations for 
clear hardware abstractions. That 'bios message queue' thing is absolute 
madness for example. But the type-opaque software API too.

	Ingo
--
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/