lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
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

Cheers,
Dan

--
/--------------- - - - - - -
| Daniel Noe
| http://isomerica.net/~dpn/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-08 22:41    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans