Subject: Re: looking for devices on PCI bus
To: Michael Lyle <email@example.com>
From: Chris G. Demetriou <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 05/01/2001 17:07:08
email@example.com (Michael Lyle) writes:
> *nods* I realize that.. the nice thing is, if there is a -current table-
> kept in the kernel of what the PCI config is, that can just be queried
> instead of rescanning-- e.g. it makes the solution general purpose and
> avoids the need to duplicate / reinvoke code.
This type of functionality is needed approximately never.
Autoconfiguration code is also run approximately never.
It would seem to be a mistake to do something which:
* involved significant code size increase, or
* involved significant data size increase
to accomodate something which happens almost never.
This is a space-time tradeoff... In my opinion, at least, it's better
to run the code to rescan things -- almost never -- than always waste
data space on such a table. (That is, assuming the code increase is
approx. the same in either case...)
> The contents of this message are confidential.
> Copyright 2001 M. Lyle
If it's confidential, then you really shouldn't be sending it to a
public e-mail list, now should you... 8-)