[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080210191313.GA9045@colo.lackof.org>
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 12:13:13 -0700
From: Grant Grundler <grundler@...isc-linux.org>
To: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
Cc: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Tony Camuso <tcamuso@...hat.com>,
Grant Grundler <grundler@...isc-linux.org>,
Loic Prylli <loic@...i.com>, Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
linux-pci@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, Martin Mares <mj@....cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Change pci_raw_ops to pci_raw_read/write
On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 07:51:22AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
> Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 09:45:28 -0500
> Subject: [PATCH] Change pci_raw_ops to pci_raw_read/write
...
> -static int
> -pci_read (struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn, int where, int size, u32 *value)
> +static int pci_read(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn, int where,
> + int size, u32 *value)
> {
> - return raw_pci_ops->read(pci_domain_nr(bus), bus->number,
> + return raw_pci_read(pci_domain_nr(bus), bus->number,
> devfn, where, size, value);
Willy,
Just wondering...why don't we just pass "struct bus*" through to the
raw_pci* ops?
My thinking is if a PCI bus controller or bridge is discovered, then we should
always create a matching "struct bus *".
Your patch looks fine to me but if you (and others) agree with the above,
I can make patch to change the internal interface. The pci_*_config API
needs to remain the same.
...
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/quirks.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/quirks.c
> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ static void __devinit quirk_intel_irqbalance(struct pci_dev *dev)
> pci_write_config_byte(dev, 0xf4, config|0x2);
>
> /* read xTPR register */
> - raw_pci_ops->read(0, 0, 0x40, 0x4c, 2, &word);
> + raw_pci_read(0, 0, 0x40, 0x4c, 2, &word);
Why are we using raw_pci_read here instead of pci_read_config_dword()?
If the pci_write_config_byte() above works, then I expect the read
to work too.
To be clear, this is not a problem with this patch...rather a seperate
problem with the original code.
hth,
grant
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists