[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [regression] e1000e broke e1000
    Matthew Wilcox wrote:
    > On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 04:12:29PM -0400, Dan Noe wrote:
    >> It would be nice if lspci could display what driver had claimed a
    >> particular device
    > You need to upgrade to a more recent version of lspci -- it already does
    > this ;-)

    Hah, thanks. That is useful and very new :) I built a newer lspci and
    I see it is now displayed with the -k option.

    > Maybe 'status' would be a better name than 'broken'. We could even
    > default it to 'unclaimed' then. Or 'driver_status' to avoid conflicting
    > with some bus that might have a 'status' bit we try to report through
    > sysfs.

    I agree however that the opportunity for more status would be good. And
    status is a better name than "broken". This way it is easy to scan all
    devices on the system via sysfs and easily visualize via lspci or some
    other tool:

    1) Unclaimed devices

    2) Devices that aren't working properly - and why (please something more
    than "This device is not working properly" :)

    3) Devices that are claimed and working properly


    /--------------- - - - - - -
    | Daniel Noe

     \ /
      Last update: 2008-04-08 22:41    [W:0.020 / U:84.536 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site