Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 18:26:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 18:26:04 -0500 Received: from pizda.ninka.net ([216.101.162.242]:8329 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 12 Dec 2000 18:25:59 -0500 Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 14:39:31 -0800 Message-Id: <200012122239.OAA05669@pizda.ninka.net> From: "David S. Miller" To: groudier@club-internet.fr CC: mj@suse.cz, lk@tantalophile.demon.co.uk, davej@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: (message from G?rard Roudier on Tue, 12 Dec 2000 21:28:18 +0100 (CET)) Subject: Re: pdev_enable_device no longer used ? In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 21:28:18 +0100 (CET) From: G?rard Roudier You can be as dump as you want with PCI, but not that much. :-) Your point is well taken. Btw, unlike the person, that proposed it, that will be able to test peer-to-peer unability only, my current machine will allow to test peer-to-peer ability only between 2 different PCI BUSes. :-) For now, my intention is to encapsulate the right interface as seen from my brain device in macros and forget about it until a new interface will be provided. I will first implement it on SYM-2 and backport changes to sym53c8xx later. And since I need the new major driver version to be tested on non-Intel platforms, this will make full synergy for the testings. :-) Ok, meanwhile I will try to code up the generic interface. It will work like this: 1) I will code up something I know each port can implement 2) I will show it to those here and everyone can tell me if they can make use of it at all :-) Later, David S. Miller davem@redhat.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/