Hi all, is that still in the agenda ? Also, what is the reason why the last parameter of AcpiOsDerivePciId() is "ACPI_PCI_ID **" and not just "ACPI_PCI_ID *" ? Are there any situations, where AcpiOsDerivePciId would want to reallocate PciId ? Lin Ming wrote: > 2010/4/22 Grégoire Sutre : >> Hi Lin, >> >> Many thanks for your explanantion, I understand now why the second >> argument passed to AcpiOsDerivePciId is a handle to the (PCI_Config) >> operation region. >> >> But regarding the first argument of AcpiOsDerivePciId: the ACPICA >> programmer reference says that: it is a handle to _the PCI device_. >> >> My question is: which PCI device? >> >> In my (possibly wrong) interpretation of the documentation, _the PCI >> device_ is the device for which AcpiOsDerivePciId shall return an >> updated Pci id. >> >> However, as far as I understand the code of AcpiEvPciConfigRegionSetup >> (in file evrgnini.c), _the PCI device_ turns out to be an ancestor of >> the device for which AcpiOsDerivePciId shall return an updated Pci id. >> This ancestor being the upstream PCI root bridge (or the ACPI root node >> if none was found). This interpretation of _the PCI device_ is also >> consistent with my understanding of the Linux implementation of >> AcpiOsDerivePciId, which finds the updated PCI id by ``traversing'' the >> PCI-to-PCI bridges that are on the branch from AcpiOsDerivePciId's first >> argument to its second argument. > > You are right, the first argument is the PCI root node. > We may need to update the doc to figure out this. > > Thanks, > Lin Ming > _______________________________________________ > Devel mailing list > Devel(a)acpica.org > http://lists.acpica.org/listinfo/devel > > To: gregoire.sutre(a)gmail.com > Cc: devel(a)acpica.org -- Ruediger "Rudi" Ihle "There's a fine line between wrong and visionary. Unfortunately you have to be a visionary to see it." - Sheldon Cooper, Ph.D.