I'm not really sure if it's correct. It works for me. I guess a safer way would be to gradually increase the subordinate value down a path as you find more and more bridges below. The old code might not have had this problem, but it was quite broken in other ways. -- Lennart Johan Danielsson wrote:
Lennart Augustsson <augustss%netbsd.org@localhost> writes:Number PCI busses using a simple pre-order numbering instead of some strange binary split numbering that doesn't work with multiple bridges on the same bus, nor with deeply nested bridges.Is this correct? Doesn't this result in bridges responding to all configuration transactions, and not only to ones targeting down stream buses? /Johan