On Sun, 2013-09-29 at 19:51 +0800, Lian Minghuan-b31939 wrote: > >> +/* > >> + * The fsl_arch_* functions are arch hooks. Those functions are > >> + * implemented as weak symbols so that they can be overridden by > >> + * architecture specific code if needed. > >> + */ > >> + > >> +/* Return PCI64 DMA offset */ > >> +u64 fsl_arch_pci64_dma_offset(void); > > Is this always guaranteed to exist? > [Minghuan] Yes. I define a __weak implementation in pci-fsl.c I meant is it guaranteed that such a mapping exists? The API doesn't give a way to say "no". Also you should describe what "PCI64 DMA offset" means. > >> +/* Register PCI/PCIe controller to architecture system */ > >> +int __weak fsl_arch_pci_sys_register(struct fsl_pci *pci); > >> + > >> +/* Remove PCI/PCIe controller from architecture system */ > >> +void __weak fsl_arch_pci_sys_remove(struct fsl_pci *pci); > > Why do these need to be weak? Won't there be exactly one implementation > > per supported arch? > [Minghuan] I added __weak for compiling kernel when selecting pci-fsl > module but > there is no related arch pci implementation. The module should not be buildable on arches that don't have support. -Scott -- 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
