On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 07:09:08PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
> >On Tuesday 21 February 2006 22:55, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> >
> >
> >>It doesn't matter how easily its added, it is the wrong place to add
> >>such things.
> >>
> >>This is what the various functions called during pci_driver::probe() do...
> >
> >
> >The problem is that at least on the e1000 it only applies to some of the
> >many PCI-IDs it supports. So the original patch had an long ugly switch
> >with PCI IDs to check it. I suggested to use driver_data for it then,
> >but Kenji-San ended up with this new field. I actually like the idea
> >of the new field because it would allow to add such things very easily
> >without adding lots of code.
> >
> >it's not an uncommon situation. e.g. consider driver A which supports
> >a lot of PCI-IDs but MSI only works on a few of them. How do you
> >handle this? Add an ugly switch that will bitrot? Or put all the
> >information into a single place which is the pci_device_id array.
>
> You do what tons of other drivers do, and indicate this via driver_data.
> An enumerated type in driver_data can be used to uniquely identify any
> device or set of devices.
>
> No need to add anything.
Yes, I agree, use driver_data, it's simpler, and keeps the PCI core
clean.
thanks,
greg k-h
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
