On 05/06/2013 10:38 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 11:53 PM, Bin Gao <bin....@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 01, 2013 at 11:17:10AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>> Is there any possibility of multi-function devices at bus 0, device 0, 2,
>>> or 3?
>>>
>>> What about bridges -- can any of these be a bridge?
>>>
>>> If either of those could happen, these checks could be too specific.
>> 0:2:0 and 0:3:0 are the only 2 devices behind the bridge 0:0:0.
>
> Please use the conventional Linux PCI address formatting
> (DDDD:BB:dd.f, where DDDD = domain (optional, often omitted if DDDD ==
> 0), BB = bus, dd = device, f = function), because this is quite
> confusing.
>
> You say "0:2:0 and 0:3:0" are behind the bridge "0:0:0", but the patch
> you sent clearly applies only to devices on bus 0. The patch applies
> to devices 00:00.0, 00:02.0, and 00:03.0. These are all on the same
> bus, so none of them can be behind a bridge.
>
> If the 00:00.0 device is in fact a bridge, its secondary bus will be
> something other than 0, so any devices behind the bridge will be on a
> non-zero bus number. And I assume you would want to use config
> mechanism #1 to reach those devices, too. Your current patch doesn't
> do that -- it only applies to devices on bus 0.
>
0000:00:00.0 is presumably the *host bridge*, which is unique in PCI
space in that it is a type 0 header and sits on what normally would be
the client bus.
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
