Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 31 Oct 2002 19:59:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 31 Oct 2002 19:59:14 -0500 Received: from 12-231-249-244.client.attbi.com ([12.231.249.244]:29715 "HELO kroah.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 31 Oct 2002 19:59:14 -0500 Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 17:02:41 -0800 From: Greg KH To: "Lee, Jung-Ik" Cc: linux-kernel Subject: Re: RFC: bare pci configuration access functions ? Message-ID: <20021101010241.GE12405@kroah.com> References: <72B3FD82E303D611BD0100508BB29735046DFF69@orsmsx102.jf.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <72B3FD82E303D611BD0100508BB29735046DFF69@orsmsx102.jf.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1011 Lines: 26 Wait, first off, are we talking about 2.4, or 2.5 here? For 2.5 I think everything is covered, right? On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 11:29:19AM -0800, Lee, Jung-Ik wrote: > Question: > ======== > Will it be desirable to have bare global pci config access functions as seen > in i386/ia64 pci codes ? It's clean and needs just what it takes - seg, bus, > dev, func, where, value, and size. No, I do not think so. I think the way 2.5 does this is the correct way. But as I did that patch, I might be a bit biased :) We could just force every arch to export the same functions that i386 and ia64 does, that shouldn't be a big deal. I think this would solve the problem on 2.4 for pci hotplug, as ACPI is already "cheating" and doing this right now... thanks, greg k-h - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/