Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2004 12:14:45 +0900
From: Kenji Kaneshige <kaneshige.kenji@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] missing pci_disable_device()
In-reply-to: <1094550581.9150.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: greg@kroah.com, akpm@osdl.org, bjorn.helgaas@hp.com,
       Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Message-id: <413E7925.1010801@jp.fujitsu.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; ja-JP; rv:1.4)
 Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
References: <413D0E4E.1000200@jp.fujitsu.com>
 <1094550581.9150.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1210
Lines: 34

Alan Cox wrote:

> On Maw, 2004-09-07 at 02:26, Kenji Kaneshige wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> As mentioned in Documentaion/pci.txt, pci device driver should call
>> pci_disable_device() to deallocate any IRQ resources, disable PCI
>> bus-mastering and etc. when it decides to stop using the device.
>> But there seems to be many drivers that don't use pci_disable_device()
>> properly so far.
> 
> Think about unloading frame buffers or PCI devices with multiple
> functions and multiple drivers. I agree the drivers definitely want
> fixing where appropriate. I'm not sure your approach is safe (although a

I don't understand what you are worried about. Could you tell me
what would be a problem with frame buffers or PCI devices with
multiple functions?

> debug printk would work wonders perhaps ?)

Exactly. I think debug printk is more important because what we
really need is fixing all broken drivers which don't call
pci_disable_device().

Thanks,
Kenji Kaneshige


-
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/