2012/4/24 Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx>: > On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 8:52 AM, Richard Yang > <weiyang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> All, >> >> I am reading the pci_scan_bridge() and not sure what will happen in >> following situation. >> >> Suppose the kernel is not passed the pci=assign-busses. >> >> Below is a picture about the pci system. >> >> +-------+ >> | | root bridge(0,255) >> +---+---+ >> | Bus 0 >> -----+-----------+------------------------------+-- >> | | >> | | >> | | >> +----+----+ +-----+-----+ >> | | B1(1,15) | |B2(16,28) >> +----+----+ +-----+-----+ >> | Bus 1 | Bus 16 >> -----+----------------------- ----------+---------------- >> | >> +----+----+ >> | | B3 >> +---------+ >> >> Suppose B1 and B2 works fine with the BIOS, which get the right bus >> number and range. >> >> B3 does not works fine with the BIOS, which doesn't get the bus number. >> >> So in pci_scan_bridge(), B3 will be met in the second pass and get bus >> number 16? >> Would this be a conflict? > > busn_alloc patchset should address your concern. > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/yinghai/linux-yinghai.git > for-pci-busn-alloc > hmm... the code changes too much... I need more time to understanding it. while the case i found is different from that reported by Don. > 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 -- Richard Yang Help You, Help Me -- 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
