| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 06/10] x86/PCI: Enable scanning of all pci functi
|
To: |
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 06/10] x86/PCI: Enable scanning of all pci functions |
|
From: |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Wed, 13 May 2009 13:32:49 -0700 |
|
Cc: |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@xxxxxxx>, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Alex Nixon <alex.nixon@xxxxxxxxxx>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> |
|
Delivery-date: |
Wed, 13 May 2009 13:33:28 -0700 |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<20090513102316.5ef3ce4e@jbarnes-g45> |
|
List-help: |
<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
|
List-id: |
Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-post: |
<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-subscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
|
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
|
References: |
<1242164891-3859-1-git-send-email-jeremy@xxxxxxxx> <1242164891-3859-7-git-send-email-jeremy@xxxxxxxx> <20090513095535.140134e1@jbarnes-g45> <4A0AFE84.2040805@xxxxxxxx> <20090513102316.5ef3ce4e@jbarnes-g45> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090320) |
Jesse Barnes wrote:
I'd probably go the weak function path if I were to do either of
those, but do you think it would be significantly better?
Well it would avoid the #undef, which is the gross part. But since
it's just a boolean, you could also do
#ifndef PCI_SCAN_ALL_FNS
#define PCI_SCAN_ALL_FNS 0
#endif
in the generic code, then just set it to 1 before asm-generic/pci.h
gets included. That would mean updating arch code though.
If its just x86 then that's OK, but I'd prefer not to have to touch all
arches. Hm, doesn't look too bad.
Anyway it's not a big deal, this code is already ugly (a 0 define for
all arches? why?) so you shouldn't have to spend too much time
cleaning it up.
Yes, it seems to be a vestigial thing which goes into pre-git-history.
I think when I dug into it, I found there was one Power user of it, but
that use evaporated in their arch unification. But I might be
mis-remembering.
J
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home