Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262263AbTFTN5e (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jun 2003 09:57:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262283AbTFTN5e (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jun 2003 09:57:34 -0400 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:61849 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262263AbTFTN5c (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jun 2003 09:57:32 -0400 Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 15:11:32 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Martin Zwickel Cc: Matthew Wilcox , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] reimplement pci proc name Message-ID: <20030620141132.GS24357@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> References: <20030620134811.GR24357@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> <20030620160228.654e181c.martin.zwickel@technotrend.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030620160228.654e181c.martin.zwickel@technotrend.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 892 Lines: 21 On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 04:02:28PM +0200, Martin Zwickel wrote: > Hi Matthew! > > Just one question: > If pci_name_bus copies the bus' hex to name and always returns 0, > the "if (!pci_name_bus(name, bus)) return -EEXIST;" would always be true, right? > > Or did I miss something? That's currently correct. My understanding is that some architectures would like to decline to create overlapping bus numbers. -- "It's not Hollywood. War is real, war is primarily not about defeat or victory, it is about death. I've seen thousands and thousands of dead bodies. Do you think I want to have an academic debate on this subject?" -- Robert Fisk - 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/