Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:48:43 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:48:33 -0500 Received: from palrel3.hp.com ([156.153.255.226]:53002 "HELO palrel3.hp.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Wed, 7 Feb 2001 14:48:26 -0500 Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 11:50:52 -0800 (PST) From: Grant Grundler Message-Id: <200102071950.LAA05408@milano.cup.hp.com> To: ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru Subject: 2.4.0 pdev_enable_device() call in setup-bus.c Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Ivan, Can you explain why pci_assign_unassigned_resources() calls pdev_enable_device() for every PCI device instead of having each PCI *driver* call pci_enable_device() as part of driver initialization? I'm thinking I missed something that a comment in the code should have explained. After having written the bulk of PCI support for parisc port, I was clearly under the impression the PCI driver was supposed to call pci_enable_device(). IMHO, it's a *bad* idea to enable a device when it's driver might not be present. thanks, grant Code from drivers/pci/setup-bus.c: void __init pci_assign_unassigned_resources(void) { ... pci_for_each_dev(dev) { pdev_enable_device(dev); } } - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/