content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Subject: PCI bug?
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 10:45:47 +0800
Message-ID: <571ACEFD467F7749BC50E0A98C17CDD803300BA2@PDSMSX403.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Thread-Topic: PCI bug?
Thread-Index: AcQRShyVGf0yYHsFTlmdKvULF/JHmA==
From: "Li, Shaohua" <shaohua.li@intel.com>
To: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: "Greg KH" <greg@kroah.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1171
Lines: 36

Hi,
I have two questions.There are one p2p bridge and 2 card bus bridges
under the p2p bridge. Firmware assign 8 for p2p bridge's subordinate bus
number. Since the bridge has default bridge number, PCI will not assign
again. But PCI does assign bus number 3~6 and 7~10 to the cardbus
bridge. And it's oversized. I must add pci=assign-busses. I guess many
systems with cardbus bridge have the problem. My question is if
pci=assign-busses should be the default behave.

And another question. Some bridges allocate many bus numbers, but they
don't use them right
now. A case is cardbus bridge. So should pci_bus_max_busnr return max
allocated bus number?

pci_bus_max_busnr(struct pci_bus* bus)
{
	struct list_head *tmp;
	unsigned char max, n;

-	max = bus->number;
+	max = bus->subordinate;
	list_for_each(tmp, &bus->children) {
		n = pci_bus_max_busnr(pci_bus_b(tmp));
		if(n > max)
			max = n;
	}
	return max;
}

thanks,
David
-
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/