> > So the answer is "yes" we should then, and move from pci_get_bus_and_slot
> > to pci_get_bus_domain_and_slot() [or just add an argument]. The point of
> > the functions is to be easy to use, so it should be handled internally.
>
> My point was that code which doesn't currently keep the bus pointer to
> hand should keep the bus pointer to hand instead of the bus number.
> That's easier to use, particularly if you want to actually do any pci
> config accesses.
If you've got the bus pointer yes. If you don't then teaching
pci_get_bus_and_slot() to handle it makes sense.
Another problem here - which bus has the legacy decode mappings ? That
will matter for ATA which also uses pci_get_bus_and_slot...
-
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]
