"David S. Miller" wrote:
>
> Jeff Garzik writes:
> > Thinking a bit more independently of bus type, and with an eye toward's
> > 2.5's s/pci_dev/device/ and s/pci_driver/driver/, would it be useful to
> > go ahead and codify the concept of PCI domains into a more generic
> > concept of bus tree numbers? (or something along those lines) That
> > would allow for a more general picture of the entire system's device
> > tree, across buses.
> >
> > First sbus bus is tree-0, first PCI bus tree is tree-1, second PCI bus
> > tree is tree-2, ...
>
> If you're going to do something like this, ie. true hierarchy, why not
> make one tree which is "system", right? Use /proc/bus/${controllernum}
> ala:
>
> /proc/bus/0/type --> "sbus", "pci", "zorro", etc.
> /proc/bus/0/* --> for type == "pci" ${bus}/${dev}.${fn}
> for type == "sbus" ${slot}
> ...
>
> How about this?
ok with me. would bus #0 be the system or root bus? that would be my
preference, in a tiered system like this.
--
Jeff Garzik | Andre the Giant has a posse.
Building 1024 |
MandrakeSoft |
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
