On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 12:40:18PM -0600, Alex Chiang wrote: > We get the "slot already scheduled for removal" because that > particular device has 2 functions, and we're creating slots on a > per-slot basis now, not a per-function basis. > > Although, I wonder, Willy -- is that really the right thing to > do? Seems like fakephp would be more useful if we did operate on > a per-function basis, and not per-slot. Especially given Yu's > work with SR-IOV, where we can apparently have lots of functions > per a physical device. I suspect it depends on what you believe the point of fakephp is. My assumption was that it was a way to fake what would happen if you had a hotplug controller for a particular slot. In that context, the change I made was clearly correct. If you want to use it for hot-removing individual functions from a Linux guest running under a hypervisor (for example), that's much less useful. -- Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre "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
