Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 23 Feb 2003 19:51:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 23 Feb 2003 19:51:34 -0500 Received: from neon-gw-l3.transmeta.com ([63.209.4.196]:40197 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 23 Feb 2003 19:51:33 -0500 Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 16:59:03 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds To: Russell King cc: Scott Murray , , Jeff Garzik , Greg KH Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make hot unplugging of PCI buses work In-Reply-To: <20030223212432.J20405@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1192 Lines: 29 On Sun, 23 Feb 2003, Russell King wrote: > > However, whether x86 PCs will survive bus renumbering or not remains to > be seen. We currently try to leave as much of the configuration intact > from the BIOS. Note that I made cardbus bus numbering _ignore_ the BIOS-setup numbering even on PC's, exactly because of issues like this - trying to keep the original BIOS numbering just won't work if the BIOS sets the wrong numbers (I saw a BIOS that had happily assigned the _same_ PCI bus number to both cardbus functions, whee). I think we can (and should) make all hotpluggable PCI bridges use that same cardbus logic. The real problematic case I see is if there are transparent hotplug bridges, with some devices just magically appear and disappear from a part of a bus because of some invisible bridge. I don't know if such things exist or even _can_ exist, but the perverse nature of PC hardware makes me suspect they do. Linus - 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/