>> Hi Bjorn, busn_resource may would not be shared by multi domains, >> >> We insert bus number resource like: >> >> pci_add_resource(&resources, &busn_resource); >> pci_bus_insert_busn_res(root_bus, start, bus_max); //start is the root bus number provided by arch pci host driver, bus max here == 255 >> get_pci_domain_busn_res(domain) //for root bus //try to get a domain specific pci_domain_busn_res, if not exist, create it. >> request_resource_conflict(domain_specific_busn_res, res) //request busn res(start, bus_max) from the pci_domain_busn_res. >> >> So every domain has its own pci_domain_busn_res , different domain would not share the same bus number resource. > > The intent of pci_add_resource() and passing the resulting resource list > into pci_scan_root_bus(), etc., is that the host bridge may consume any > resources described by the list. If we pass the same resource to multiple > calls, that means the resource must be shared between the multiple host > bridges involved. For bus numbers, that makes some sense if the platform > considers the bridges to be in the same domain, but not if they are in > different domains. > > If we export busn_resource, we have no control over what domains it becomes > associated with because the domain is passed into pci_scan_root_bus() by > the caller. Agree, I will drop this patch, thanks! > > Bjorn > > . > -- Thanks! Yijing -- 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
