On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 01:00:24PM -0600, Alex Chiang wrote: > > I'll let you guys know what I can come up with. In the > > meantime, Alex, how bad is it to create slots with the wrong > > devfn in the first place ? I don't know much about the new PCI > > slot infrastructure so ... > > So the fact that slots are actually bridges seems like it might > actually work out ok in the new infrastructure. > > We're using the combination of pci_bus and devfn to keep track of > slots we've created. If each pseries slot is its own pci_bus, > then faking in a 0 devfn for unpopulated slots at the least won't > be harmful. > > Once a device is plugged into the slot, then the slot's pci_bus > would have two entries, the fake 0 devfn and the real devfn of > the actual device. Presumably we could have rpaphp correct the devfn for the slot when a card is plugged in. It's an API we don't currently have, but it doesn't seem horrible to add it. -- Intel are signing my paycheques ... these opinions are still mine "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step." -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
