From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@sgi.com>
To: Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] quiet non-x86 option ROM warnings
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 09:29:53 -0800
User-Agent: KMail/1.7.2
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
       Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <200502151557.06049.jbarnes@sgi.com> <1108601294.5426.1.camel@gaston> <9e473391050217083312685e44@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <9e473391050217083312685e44@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200502170929.54100.jbarnes@sgi.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 866
Lines: 19

On Thursday, February 17, 2005 8:33 am, Jon Smirl wrote:
> > No, pci_map_rom shouldn't test the signature IMHO. While PCI ROMs should
> > have the signature to be recognized as containing valid firmware images
> > on x86 BIOSes an OF, it's just a convention on these platforms, and I
> > would rather let people put whatever they want in those ROMs and still
> > let them map it...
>
> pci_map_rom will return a pointer to any ROM it finds. It the
> signature is invalid the size returned will be zero. Is this ok or do
> we want it to do something different?

Shouldn't it return NULL if the signature is invalid?

Jesse
-
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/