On Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 01:00:44AM -0800, Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 09:14:06AM +0100, Martin Mares wrote: > > Hello! > > > > > I recommend we just delete the pci_bus class. I don't think it serves > > > any useful purpose. The bridge can be inferred frmo the sysfs hierarchy > > > (not to mention lspci will tell you). The cpuaffinity file should be > > > moved from the bus to the device -- it really doesn't make any sense to > > > talk about which cpu a bus is affine to, only a device. > > > > It doesn't seem to serve any useful purpose other than the affinity now, > > but I still think that it conceptually belongs there, because it makes > > sense to have per-bus attributes. For example, in the future we could > > show data width and signalling speed.
Data width is kind of hard to figure out since it's negotiated per transaction. One could conceive of a device which only does 32-bit transactions to some addresses, and 64-bit transactions to others. What I've done in recent patches is make these kinds of attributes available per slot. > So, if it were to stay, where in the tree should it be? Hanging off of > the pci device that is the bridge? Or just placing these files within > the pci device directory itself, as it is the bridge. /sys/bus/pci/busses ? > There are also some "legacy io" binary sysfs files in these directories > for those platforms that support it (#ifdef HAVE_PCI_LEGACY), and I'm > guessing that there is some user for them out there, otherwise they > would not have been added... > > Hm, only ia64 enables that option. Matthew, do you care about those > files? I think they were added for Altix ... not sure who uses them. Maybe X? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
