From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:52428 "EHLO gate.crashing.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752846AbYBSGb4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Feb 2008 01:31:56 -0500 Subject: Re: [patch 4/4] RFC: PCI: consolidate several pcibios_enable_resources() implementations From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Reply-To: benh@kernel.crashing.org In-Reply-To: <20080219044307.878416912@ldl.fc.hp.com> References: <20080219043952.845136014@ldl.fc.hp.com> <20080219044307.878416912@ldl.fc.hp.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 17:31:07 +1100 Message-Id: <1203402667.6740.94.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Bjorn Helgaas Cc: linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Russell King , linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk, Kyle McMartin , Matthew Wilcox , Grant Grundler , linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Chris Zankel On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 21:39 -0700, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > powerpc: has a different collision check at (5) I've always found the collision check dodgy. I tend to want to keep the way powerpc does it here. pci_enable_device() should only enable resources that have successfully been added to the resource tree (that have passed all the collision check etc...). There is a simple & clear indication of that: res->parent is non-NULL. I think that is a better check than the test x86 does on start and end. That is, whatever the arch code decides to use to decide whether resources are assigned by firmware or by the first pass assignment code or not and collide or not, once that phase is finished (which is the case when calling pcibios_enable_device(), having the resource in the resource-tree or not is, I believe, the proper way to test whether it's a useable resource. Ben.