On Mon, 3 Sep 2007 10:17:39 +0200
Robert Richter <robert.richter@amd.com> wrote:

Hi,

As said before, I like the general approach. I have two comments below
though...

quoted text
>  
> -	if ((bus > 255) || (devfn > 255) || (reg > 255)) 
> +	if ((bus > 255) || (devfn > 255) || (reg > 4095))
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  

Comment 1:
Can we make the 256/4096 thing conditional on actually having the
feature somehow? (while not making the code TOO ugly)

Comment 2: 
The cpu_has_XXX is a bit dubious; while it's dependent on your cpu
model right now, I'm a bit hesitant to consider a PCI feature something
that belongs in the cpu_has_XXX namespace. (Yes I know PCI is moving
into the cpu package, but on a logical level it seems just the wrong
place).
Do we need a platform_has_XXX namespace for things like this?


-- 
If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@linux.intel.com
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/