From: Kristen Accardi <kristen.c.accardi@intel.com>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: pcihpd-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net, greg@kroah.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] pciehp: dont call pci_enable_dev
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 09:32:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1146069164.25081.5.camel@whizzy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1146066747.7016.17.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
On Wed, 2006-04-26 at 17:52 +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 15:00 -0700, Kristen Accardi wrote:
> > On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 08:16 +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 15:50 -0700, Kristen Accardi wrote:
> > > > Don't call pci_enable_device from pciehp because the pcie port service driver
> > > > already does this.
> > >
> > > hmmmm shouldn't pci_enable_device on a previously enabled device just
> > > succeed? Sounds more than logical to me to make it that way at least...
> >
> > I can't think of any reason why not. Something like this what you had
> > in mind perhaps?
> >
> > ---
>
> the question then becomes if enable/disable should become "counting", eg
> enable twice disable once leaves enabled at count one....
ugh, no. 1) I think we should avoid adding more counting unless it's
absolutely necessary. 2) if a device calls pci_disable_device it should
always actually disable the device, because it is generally called in
drivers either when the device is being shutdown, or suspended.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-04-26 16:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-04-24 22:50 [patch] pciehp: dont call pci_enable_dev Kristen Accardi
2006-04-25 6:16 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-04-25 22:00 ` Kristen Accardi
2006-04-26 6:04 ` [Pcihpd-discuss] " Rolf Eike Beer
2006-04-26 15:52 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-04-26 16:32 ` Kristen Accardi [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1146069164.25081.5.camel@whizzy \
--to=kristen.c.accardi@intel.com \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pcihpd-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.