From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Ville_Syrj=E4l=E4?= Subject: Re: ACPI Source patches updated (20021022) Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 20:15:18 +0300 Sender: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Message-ID: <20021024201518.A2708@sci.fi> References: <20021023110222.A14630@sci.fi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: ; from kai-germaschewski-Q3dYeWy5uxSHXe+LvDLADg@public.gmane.org on Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 10:29:04AM -0500 Errors-To: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: To: Kai Germaschewski Cc: "Grover, Andrew" , acpi-devel-pyega4qmqnRoyOMFzWx49A@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 10:29:04AM -0500, Kai Germaschewski wrote: > Well, this patch is obviously not correct, consider the case where the > loop is executed more than once. > > I think it should be > > while (!irq && bridge->bus->self) { > pin = (pin + PCI_SLOT(bridge->devfn)) % 4; > bridge = bridge->bus->self; > irq = acpi_pci_irq_lookup(0, bridge->bus->number, PCI_SLOT(bridge->devfn), pin); > } Yes I see the logic in that. But I don't know enough about PCI to relly understand how things work. Over one iteration this does exactly what my patch did and that's what I care about :) Is it even realistic to expect that multiple bridges are lined up so that the loop would get executed more than once? -- Ville Syrjälä syrjala-ORSVBvAovxo@public.gmane.org http://www.sci.fi/~syrjala/ ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: Influence the future of Java(TM) technology. Join the Java Community Process(SM) (JCP(SM)) program now. http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?sunm0003en