On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 5:30 PM, Gavin Shan wrote:
> Yeah, I think your patch meets the requirement: access "struct
> pci_host_bridge",
> and when will you merge your patch into mainline?
not sure.
but i extract that patch as attached.
and with that could make your first patch only make find_pc
>> >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(pci_bus_host_bridge);
>>
>> Yinghai, thanks for your time on this :-)
>>
>> >
>> >why do you need to export it?
>> >
>>
>> The reason is that we have introduced extra fields to "struct
>> pci_host_bridge"
>> in [PATCH 2/2] and platform want to access those extra fields.
>
>
On Tue, 2012-06-26 at 08:30 +0800, Gavin Shan wrote:
> >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(pci_bus_host_bridge);
>
> Yinghai, thanks for your time on this :-)
>
> >
> >why do you need to export it?
> >
>
> The reason is that we have introduced extra fields to "struct
> pci_host_bridge"
> in [PATCH 2/2] and platfo
>> With current implementation, there is one function to retrieve
>> the corresponding host bridge (struct pci_host_bridge) according
>> to the given PCI device (struct pci_dev) and that function has
>> been declared as "static". Further, we don't have the public
>> function to retrieve host bridge
On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 8:10 PM, Gavin Shan wrote:
> With current implementation, there is one function to retrieve
> the corresponding host bridge (struct pci_host_bridge) according
> to the given PCI device (struct pci_dev) and that function has
> been declared as "static". Further, we don't hav
With current implementation, there is one function to retrieve
the corresponding host bridge (struct pci_host_bridge) according
to the given PCI device (struct pci_dev) and that function has
been declared as "static". Further, we don't have the public
function to retrieve host bridge from PCI bus y
