On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 03:38:13PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Wed, 9 May 2007 02:53:02 -0700, > Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > 2. Sheer volume of devices on a bus. Even if the indivdual probing > > > doesn't take long, having all devices probed one after the other may > > > take a lot of time. Putting the actual probe on a thread makes it > > > possible to run several probes in parallel, thereby cutting probing > > > time. > > > > Again, not for PCI, right? > > It seems that everyone agrees now that moving PCI over to a new probing > model without individual driver support was a bad idea. So generic > multithreaded probing is dead.
Why is it dead? Since when is PCI the only bus in the system? > > If you want to implement this for your bus type, fine, I have no > > objection to that at all, but not for PCI, it's just not worth it. > > Infrastructure for async probing might not be such a bad idea, though. > (Aren't there some huge PCI-based machines?) However, I don't really > care whether PCI or SCSI or $HUGE_BUS use it, but serial synchronous > probing on a bus looks like a killer on most large systems. PCI probing is just reading stuff from memory. The slowness happens when storage devices need to spin up and/or discover attached drives. So, the async stuff can be done in those buses if wanted/needed, PCI is not the problem here. thanks, greg k-h - 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/
