On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 12:27 PM, Rajat Jain <raja...@google.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelg...@google.com> wrote: >> The pciehp debug logging is overly verbose and often redundant. Almost all >> of the information printed by dbg_ctrl() is also printed by the normal PCI >> core enumeration code and by pcie_init(). >> >> Remove the redundant debug info. >> >> When claiming a pciehp bridge, we print the slot characteristics, e.g., >> >> Slot #6 AttnBtn- AttnInd- PwrInd- PwrCtrl- MRL- Interlock- NoCompl+ >> LLActRep+ >> >> Add the Hot-Plug Capable and Hot-Plug Surprise bits to this information, > > If the slot is not hotplug capable. then pciehp wouldn't claim it in > the first place. > > So printing of "hotplug capable" may really not be needed..
Yes, I did think about that, and you're right that it probably isn't needed. But the criteria for claiming a slot and deciding whether acpiphp or pciehp should manage it are not 100% clear yet, so I figured it wouldn't hurt to be a bit more transparent. Bjorn -- 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/
