linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: CVS Update@-mips.org: linux

To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl>
Subject: Re: CVS Update@-mips.org: linux
From: Jun Sun <jsun@mvista.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 10:20:13 -0700
Cc: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, jsun@mvista.com
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.55.0404211608570.28167@jurand.ds.pg.gda.pl>; from macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl on Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 04:11:29PM +0200
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <20040420163230Z8225288-1530+99@linux-mips.org> <20040420105116.C22846@mvista.com> <20040420201128.GC24025@linux-mips.org> <20040420153108.F22846@mvista.com> <Pine.LNX.4.55.0404211608570.28167@jurand.ds.pg.gda.pl>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 04:11:29PM +0200, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Apr 2004, Jun Sun wrote:
> 
> > > drivers/pci can do that, you just need to supply a few board specific
> > > functions, see for example arch/alpha/kernel/pci.c.  So pci_auto.c isn't
> > > only b0rked, it also duplicates code.
> > 
> > Has anybody succssfully used pci_assign_unassigned_resources() in latest 
> > 2.4?
> > It was badly broken in early 2.4 kernels while pci_auto was the only 
> > option.
> 
>  In that case, fixing pci_assign_unassigned_resources() was the right way
> to go, instead of implementing a system-specific workaround.  

Using pci_auto() represented a different approach, which to many seems more
correct.  It does assignment first and then scanning.  It is supplied
as a replacement for broken firmware.

At one time a couple of pci_auto()'s existed in more than one arch.  And
there was a chance to make this approach the official one and completely 
eliminate pci_assign_unassigned_resources().

Having competing approaches co-existing in Linux is a norm.

> There are no
> excuses -- the source is available.
> 

Please don't always assume other people are more ignorant ....

Jun

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>