ollie at lanl.gov
Thu Nov 4 10:17:01 CET 2004
On Wed, 2004-11-03 at 17:31, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Li-Ta Lo <ollie at lanl.gov> writes:
> > On Wed, 2004-11-03 at 16:19, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > > Li-Ta Lo <ollie at lanl.gov> writes:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 2004-11-03 at 15:51, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > > > > So my immediate suggestion would be to call pci_set_method from the
> > > > pci_domain's
> > > >
> > > > > scan_bus method before it does anything. We can worry about the rest
> > later.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Isn't the root_dev::scan_bus() called before pci_domain::scan_bus() ?
> > > Yes but it uses scan_static_bus()
> > >
> > But the mainboard::enable_dev() updatea the root_dev::scan_bus(), if I
> > am right. So the mainboard::scan_bus() will be called before
> > pci_domain::scan_bus().
> I am not arguing that you cannot arrange a scenario where it cannot
> happen. And an enable_dev method may be a slightly more appropriate place
> to set the pci_ops than early in scan_bus. What I am arguing is that
> I believe we have no remaining code that sanely does that. And that
> for the future it can be as simple as saying don't do that then.
Hmm. you removed all mainboard:enable_dev(). Now there are much few
More information about the coreboot