From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com>
To: "Gérard Roudier" <groudier@club-internet.fr>
Cc: tom_gall@vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RFC: Changes for PCI
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 17:12:15 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3B3B9DAF.56119F88@mandrakesoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20010628223210.Q1578-100000@>
Gérard Roudier wrote:
> The driver checks against PCI bus+dev+func in 2 situations:
>
> 1) To apply the boot order that user can set up in the controller NVRAMs.
> 2) To detect buggy double reporting of the same device by the kernel PCI
> code (this made lot of troubles at some time).
Cool. The premise of the thread was that you merely were checking for
uniqueness, not order. That changes our answer...
> The great bug is to invent useless abstractions that don't match reality.
> Such brain masturbation leads to confusion (hence subtle bugs) and
> useless software bloatage (thus _real_ resource wastage).
>
> If we want to handle _real_ PCI bus domains, we just have to add a domain
> number to identify a _real_ PCI device. Anything that wants to hide such
> reality in some opaque data looks like brain masturbation to me.
I think all of us agree on this: in 2.5, our solution is to have a
system domain number, which increases from zero each time you add sbus,
pci bus, isa bus, etc.
For 2.4, non-x86 arches first had to deal with PCI domains, so the
solution was to stick "arch-specific data" into pci_dev->sysdata, which
in some cases was the PCI domain number.
So, you have an ugly solution in drivers for 2.4 if you need to know PCI
domain for what reason, and a clean solution in 2.5.
Jeff
--
Jeff Garzik | Andre the Giant has a posse.
Building 1024 |
MandrakeSoft |
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-06-28 21:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-06-27 22:06 RFC: Changes for PCI Tom Gall
2001-06-27 22:15 ` Jeff Garzik
2001-06-27 22:57 ` Tom Gall
2001-06-27 23:34 ` Jeff Garzik
2001-06-27 18:24 ` Tom Gall
2001-06-28 20:57 ` Gérard Roudier
2001-06-28 21:11 ` Tom Gall
2001-06-28 21:18 ` Jeff Garzik
2001-06-28 21:12 ` Jeff Garzik [this message]
2001-06-28 1:02 ` David S. Miller
2001-06-27 19:07 ` Tom Gall
2001-06-29 5:22 ` Richard Henderson
2001-06-29 3:14 ` Tom Gall
2001-06-27 23:17 ` anton
2001-06-28 1:04 ` David S. Miller
2001-06-27 18:49 ` Tom Gall
2001-06-28 4:06 ` David S. Miller
2001-06-27 20:01 ` Tom Gall
[not found] ` <mailman.993682861.9307.linux-kernel2news@redhat.com>
2001-06-27 23:41 ` Pete Zaitcev
2001-06-28 0:48 ` David S. Miller
2001-06-28 1:00 ` David S. Miller
2001-06-27 23:12 ` anton
2001-06-28 0:59 ` David S. Miller
2001-06-28 16:48 ` Todd Inglett
2001-06-28 17:01 ` Jeff Garzik
2001-06-28 17:20 ` Todd Inglett
2001-06-28 17:01 ` Alan Cox
2001-06-28 21:54 ` Gérard Roudier
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-06-28 23:08 Khachaturov, Vassilii
2001-06-28 23:27 ` Jeff Garzik
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=3B3B9DAF.56119F88@mandrakesoft.com \
--to=jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com \
--cc=groudier@club-internet.fr \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tom_gall@vnet.ibm.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox