From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761912AbXLTMX2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:23:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759588AbXLTMXU (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:23:20 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:56617 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759535AbXLTMXT (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:23:19 -0500 Message-ID: <476A5EAF.6020008@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:23:11 -0500 From: Tony Camuso Reply-To: tcamuso@redhat.com User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gregkh@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz Subject: [Fwd: Re: [PATCH 1/5]PCI: x86 MMCONFIG: introduce PCI_USING_MMCONF] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To all, The next few forwarded messages comprise my responses to Greg's questions about the patch I submitted to deal with pci devices that do not respond correctly to x86 mmconf accesses. Please accept my apologies for not having including the community in my original responses. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5]PCI: x86 MMCONFIG: introduce PCI_USING_MMCONF Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 18:58:45 -0500 From: Tony Camuso Reply-To: tcamuso@redhat.com To: Greg KH References: <20071219221746.20362.39243.sendpatchset@dhcp83-188.boston.redhat.com> <20071219221751.20362.23451.sendpatchset@dhcp83-188.boston.redhat.com> <20071219230447.GA24219@suse.de> Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 05:17:51PM -0500, tcamuso@redhat.com wrote: >> >> +extern struct pci_ops pci_legacy_ops; /* direct.c */ > > This isn't needed in this patch at all, and might make the compiler > confused if you were to build with only this patch present :( > > thanks, > > greg k-h Yes, of course. I missed that. Thank you. Should I resubmit that one patch? Or would you prefer I resubmit the whole patch set?