From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jun'ichi Nomura" Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 19:32:52 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] (-mm) drivers/pci/msi: explicit declaration of msi_register Message-Id: <4419BD64.5070705@ce.jp.nec.com> List-Id: References: <44172F0E.6070708@ce.jp.nec.com> <20060314134535.72eb7243.akpm@osdl.org> <44176502.9050109@ce.jp.nec.com> <20060315235544.GA6504@suse.de> <44198210.6090109@ce.jp.nec.com> <20060316181934.GM13666@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20060316181934.GM13666@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Mark Maule Cc: Greg KH , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, shaohua.li@intel.com Hi Mark, Thanks for the reply. Mark Maule wrote: >>There is another problem that CONFIG_IA64_GENERIC still doesn't >>build due to error in SGI SN specific code. >>It needs additional fix. > > Ok, looking back at some of my original patches, it seems like the > declaration of msi_ops got moved from pci.h to and some forward declarations > in ia64/msi.h were removed. This patch corrects the build problems. But, Greg said: > these are core pci things that no one else should care about. Andrew said: > a declaration for msi_register(), in drivers/pci/pci.h. > We don't want to add a duplicated declaration like this. I think the idea already gets objections. > The reason for putting struct msi_ops in pci.h is so that msi code that > resides outside of drivers/pci can use the declaration without having to > reach down into drivers/pci. The code in arch/ia64/sn/pci/msi.c looks much like drivers/pci/msi-apic.c. Why don't you move them to drivers/pci/msi-sgi-sn.c or something? Thanks, -- Jun'ichi Nomura, NEC Solutions (America), Inc.