[lkml]   [2003]   [Jun]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC] pci_name()
On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 05:36:20PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 12:35:25AM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> >
> > I'd kind of like to get rid of pci_dev->slot_name. It's redundant with
> > pci_dev->dev.bus_id, but that's one hell of a search and replace job.
> > So let me propose pci_name(pci_dev) as a replacement. That has the
> That sounds reasonable. But do we really need to do this for 2.6?
> Just trying to keep things sane...

I think we really do need to introduce pci_name() for 2.6 (and put it
in 2.4 too). We don't need to eliminate pci_dev->slot_name for 2.6,
but drivers that care need to be able to tell the user which card is
a message is referring to. With overlapping pci bus numbers, the 8
bytes of bus:device.func is no longer unique, so we need to report the
domain number too.

That information's already placed in bus_id, but as I said, I don't
want to start converting all the drivers. We could just make slot_name
larger (Anton posted a patch for this) but I don't want to make pci_dev
even bigger. Having a nice interface like pci_name() makes drivers more
portable between 2.4, 2.6 and 2.8 (as Jeff pointed out).

"It's not Hollywood. War is real, war is primarily not about defeat or
victory, it is about death. I've seen thousands and thousands of dead bodies.
Do you think I want to have an academic debate on this subject?" -- Robert Fisk
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:36    [W:0.039 / U:0.540 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site