From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 05:42:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 05:42:03 -0400 Received: from t2.redhat.com ([199.183.24.243]:1790 "EHLO passion.cambridge.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 13 Sep 2001 05:41:48 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.4 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 From: David Woodhouse X-Accept-Language: en_GB In-Reply-To: <07E6E3B8C072D211AC4100A0C9C5758302B2731B@hasmsx52.iil.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <07E6E3B8C072D211AC4100A0C9C5758302B2731B@hasmsx52.iil.intel.com> To: "Hen, Shmulik" Cc: "'Sebastian Heidl'" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: find struct pci_dev from struct net_device Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 10:41:57 +0100 Message-ID: <7927.1000374117@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org shmulik.hen@intel.com said: > Take the value of dev->base_addr, mask it's lowest 4 bits, do a scan > of all PCI net devices and in each PCI device try to match to each of > the 6 address regs: We have to assume this isn't a deliberate attempt to mislead, and that you really do things like this in your own code. I suspect that whatever chance there was of someone trying to help out some poor user unfortunate or ignorant enough to use the binary-only modules that you are working on has just bitten the dust. -- dwmw2