PCI_DOMAIN ??

[Eric W. Biederman]

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.

The only case I remember leaving code that looked like was in emulation/qemu-i386
and that was because I thought it did not define a northbridge.  Since even that
code defines a northbridge I don't for see any problems.  I am going to examine 
all of the mainboard code though and actually look to see what is going on.

An advantage of doing this is that with just a little work I can not even
compile in support for the unused configuration type which should keep
the code a little smaller.

Eric