On Sun, 2005-01-16 at 05:48 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > > Right. Though I think the "will be back soon" and "is invisible" are > > pretty much the same thing. That is, in both our cases (BIST and pmac > > PM), we want the device to still be visible to userland, as it actually > > exist, should be properly detected by userland config tools etc..., but > > may only be actually enabled when the interface is opened/used for PM > > reasons. > > I just request that this shouldn't be done in the low level pci_config_read_* > functions. Please keep them simple and lean. If you want such complex > semantics for user space do it in a separate layer.
What is complex in there ? I agree it's not convenient to do this from the very low level ones that don't take the pci_dev * as an argument, but from the higher level ones that does, the overhead is basically to test a flag in the pci_dev, I doubt it will be significant in any way performance wise, especially compared to the cost of a config space access... Ben. - 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/
