> From: Grant Grundler [mailto:grundler@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 11:08 PM > > +static int sata_sil24_msi; /* Disable MSI */ > > +module_param_named(msi, sata_sil24_msi, bool, S_IRUGO); > > +MODULE_PARM_DESC(msi, "Enable MSI (Default: false)"); > > Vivek, > Do we even still need the parameter? I'm thinking either MSI > works with a chipset or it doesn't. The kernel has globals to > "know" which state is true. Sometimes even in a platform, some PCIe endpoints do very well with MSI while others may have to resort to legacy ints. Should we let the endpoints make the final call. > > If the parameter is needed, when this driver is compiled into > the kernel, how is "msi" parameter specified? > I think the parameter needs to be documented and fit in with > other "msi" parameters. > See "nomsi" in Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt. In this case "msi" is supposed to be passed via insmod and not via kernel cmdline. If the driver is built-in the kernel, then force sata_sil24_msi = 1 in the driver to enable it. > > If you want to keep this module parameter, can I suggest > calling the exported parameter "sata_sil24_msi"? > Will do it in the subsequent patch. > pci_intx() isn't documented in MSI-HOWTO.txt - because it's > already called: > pci_msi_enable() -> pci_msi_enable_block() -> > msi_capability_init() > -> pci_intx_for_msi(dev, 0) -> pci_intx(pdev, 0); > > (thanks to willy (Mathew Wilcox) for pointing me at > msi_capability_init() - I overlooked it) > > Please add "Reviewed-by: Grant Grundler > <grundler@xxxxxxxxxx>" once the variable name is changed and > the pci_intx() call is removed. Will take care in the upcoming patch > > cheers, > grant Thanks, Vivek -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
