Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:40:41 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, max@love2party.net Subject: Re: MFC of r180753: ABI problems? Message-ID: <200808251040.41587.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20080823.155034.1260392773.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <200808212351.13464.max@love2party.net> <200808230742.10902.jhb@freebsd.org> <20080823.155034.1260392773.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Saturday 23 August 2008 05:50:34 pm M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <200808230742.10902.jhb@freebsd.org> > John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> writes: > : On Saturday 23 August 2008 02:42:09 am M. Warner Losh wrote: > : > In message: <200808212351.13464.max@love2party.net> > : > > : > Max Laier <max@love2party.net> writes: > : > : Hi, > : > : > : > : I'm wondering how to merge r180753 to stable/7 as luoqi@ has indicated > : > : that he doesn't have time to take care of it right now. > : > : > : > : It seems that changing the size of pcicfgregs (aka struct pcicfg) which > : > : is part of struct pci_devinfo is out of the question, right? Ideas where > : > : to store the HT related state or how to avoid storing the state are > : > : welcome. > : > : > : > : The merge result is attached for reference. This fix is essential for > : > : many nforce based boards from ASUS which are rather common, I'm afraid. > : > : So it would be good to have this in 7.1/6.4, I think. > : > > : > I think this is OK. > : > > : > pcicfgregs is an internal to pci implementation detail. You've added > : > it at the end, so any leakage of the offsets won't matter. All > : > subclasses of pci would be affected. Internal to the kernel isn't all > : > that interesting, since they are all compiled at the same time. This > : > would only matter for modules. Cardbus and acpi would be the only > : > modules affected. That would mean you couldn't boot a 7.0 kernel with > : > a 7.1 set of modules or vice versa. I'm not sure that is actually > : > going to work anyway... > : > : ACPI (and OFW's) PCI bus code isn't going to care, and I doubt cardbus is > : either. Hmm, actually, cardbus doesn't, but ACPI actually does (acpi_pci > > CardBus' does because it creates a slightly larger pcicfgreg per device... I thought it did but couldn't find it in the code. ACPI is basically doing the same thing. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200808251040.41587.jhb>