On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 07:44:30PM +0100, Alexander Gordeev wrote: > On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 12:15:26PM -0500, Tejun Heo wrote: > > The use of @nvec and @maxvec is a bit inconsistent. Maybe it'd be > > better to make them uniform? > > With @maxvec I tried to stress an implication there could be values > less than @maxvec. While @nvec is more like an exact number. > Perfectly makes sense to me, but this is personal :) Oh yeah, I agree but saw a place where @nvec is used for max. Maybe I was confused. Looking again... +int pcim_enable_msi_range(struct pci_dev *dev, struct msix_entry *entries, + unsigned int nvec, unsigned int minvec) + +This variation on pci_enable_msi_block() call allows a device driver to +request any number of MSIs within specified range minvec to nvec. Whenever +possible device drivers are encouraged to use this function rather than +explicit request loop calling pci_enable_msi_block(). e.g. shouldn't that @nvec be @maxvec? Thanks. -- tejun -- 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
