From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 25 20:05:02 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E653B1065680 for ; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 20:05:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from server.baldwin.cx (bigknife-pt.tunnel.tserv9.chi1.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f10:75::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 576C78FC20 for ; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 20:05:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from localhost.corp.yahoo.com (john@localhost [IPv6:::1]) (authenticated bits=0) by server.baldwin.cx (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m7PK4Y8N043991; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 16:04:53 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) From: John Baldwin To: "M. Warner Losh" Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:40:41 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <200808212351.13464.max@love2party.net> <200808230742.10902.jhb@freebsd.org> <20080823.155034.1260392773.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <20080823.155034.1260392773.imp@bsdimp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200808251040.41587.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0.2 (server.baldwin.cx [IPv6:::1]); Mon, 25 Aug 2008 16:04:54 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.93.1/8087/Mon Aug 25 14:40:37 2008 on server.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=4.2 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, DATE_IN_PAST_03_06,NO_RELAYS autolearn=ham version=3.1.3 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on server.baldwin.cx Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, max@love2party.net Subject: Re: MFC of r180753: ABI problems? X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 20:05:03 -0000 On Saturday 23 August 2008 05:50:34 pm M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <200808230742.10902.jhb@freebsd.org> > John Baldwin writes: > : On Saturday 23 August 2008 02:42:09 am M. Warner Losh wrote: > : > In message: <200808212351.13464.max@love2party.net> > : > > : > Max Laier 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