> From: Bjorn Helgaas > ... > My question wasn't so much whether pci-hyperv.c *needs* to set MPS; I > don't expect a guest to need to or even be able to configure things > like that. I agree. > My question is whether it would do any harm if we did eventually do > MPS configuration in the generic pci_scan_child_bus() path. If/when > we do that, the Hyper-V guest will attempt to do MPS configuration. I > think this would be a no-op. Yes. It's a no-op, as I explained in my previous mail. > And I think it would also be a no-op if > we made pci-hyperv.c call pcie_bus_configure_settings() today. Yes, I can confirm it's a no-op too. > I'm really just looking for confirmation of that. If it is true that > these are no-ops, I would consider adding a pci-hyperv.c call to > pcie_bus_configure_settings() simply to make it conform to the pattern > that "everything that calls pci_scan_child_bus() should also call > pcie_bus_configure_settings()". Please help to add that. Thanks! > If every caller of pci_scan_child_bus() also calls > pcie_bus_configure_settings(), it will make it easier in the future to > fold pcie_bus_configure_settings() into pci_scan_child_bus(). > > Bjorn Thanks! I see. Thanks, -- Dexuan _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
