On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 7:35 AM, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> update pci_scan_root_bus, and pci_scan_bus to insert root bus busn into >> iobusn_resource tree. >> -struct pci_bus * __devinit pci_scan_root_bus(struct device *parent, int bus, >> - struct pci_ops *ops, void *sysdata, struct list_head *resources) >> +struct pci_bus * __devinit pci_scan_root_bus_max(struct device *parent, int bus, >> + int bus_max, struct pci_ops *ops, void *sysdata, >> + struct list_head *resources) > > We are adding "scan root bus" interfaces at an alarming rate (I'm > responsible for most of them, so I'm not blaming you :)). Could we > get away without adding this one by just adding a bus number resource > to the "resources" list? For example, then an arch could do: > > LIST_HEAD(resources); > pci_add_resource(resources, bus_window); > pci_add_resource(resources, mem_window); > pci_add_resource(resources, io_window); > pci_scan_root_bus(..., resources); > > If pci_scan_root_bus() didn't find a bus number resource in the list, > it could fall back to a default max_bus of 255. > this pci_scan_root_bus_max is only used for x86 code. and should be fixed later. Yinghai -- 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
