On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 12:48 +0200, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
[...]
> --- a/drivers/pci/msi.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/msi.c
> @@ -812,6 +812,21 @@ static int pci_msi_check_device(struct pci_dev *dev, int nvec, int type)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +int pci_get_msi_cap(struct pci_dev *dev)
> +{
> + int ret;
> + u16 msgctl;
> +
> + if (!dev->msi_cap)
> + return -EINVAL;
[...]
> --- a/include/linux/pci.h
> +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
> @@ -1144,6 +1144,11 @@ struct msix_entry {
>
>
> #ifndef CONFIG_PCI_MSI
> +static inline int pci_get_msi_cap(struct pci_dev *dev)
> +{
> + return -1;
[...]
Shouldn't this also return -EINVAL?
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.
--
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
