From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Aug  1 18:45:46 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B491316A4D1
	for <arch@freebsd.org>; Sun,  1 Aug 2004 18:45:46 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.village.org [168.103.84.182])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2498C43D2D
	for <arch@freebsd.org>; Sun,  1 Aug 2004 18:45:46 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Received: from localhost (warner@rover2.village.org [10.0.0.1])
	by harmony.village.org (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i71Ii3uD011713;
	Sun, 1 Aug 2004 12:44:03 -0600 (MDT)
	(envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 12:44:33 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <20040801.124433.26964640.imp@bsdimp.com>
To: scottl@samsco.org
From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
In-Reply-To: <410D2FEA.5050504@samsco.org>
References: <410D2FEA.5050504@samsco.org>
X-Mailer: Mew version 3.3 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
cc: arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: PCI-Express support
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture
	<freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 18:45:46 -0000

[[ replying to different aspects of this in different threads ]]

In message: <410D2FEA.5050504@samsco.org>
            Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> writes:
: Adding this for 5.3 is feasible, I think, and doesn't add a whole lot
: of risk.  PCI-E provides a legacy mde for interrupts that simulates
: PCI interrupt lines, so drivers can choose whether to use MSI or the
: legacy interrupt methods.

Code freeze is in 2 weeks.  I don't think it reasonable to have things
cooked enough by then to add this.  We've got enough going into 5.3
already, and these changes will be at the heart of the pci system,
which is a very big risk if it is done slightly badly.  Given the
large number of systems out there, I'd imagine that we'll have lots of
problems with this.  Smaller risk changes that Matt Dodd and I have
made over the years have resulted in big trouble.

I'd recommend that we give it a pass for 5.3.

Warner