From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 17:33:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 17:33:40 -0500 Received: from postfix1-2.free.fr ([213.228.0.130]:12510 "HELO postfix1-2.free.fr") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id convert rfc822-to-8bit; Thu, 29 Nov 2001 17:33:26 -0500 Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 20:40:06 +0100 (CET) From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard_Roudier?= X-X-Sender: To: "David S. Miller" Cc: , Subject: Re: sym53c875: reading /proc causes SCSI parity error In-Reply-To: <20011128.144925.94842859.davem@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20011129203311.F2019-100000@gerard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, David S. Miller wrote: > From: Gérard Roudier > Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 20:51:01 +0100 (CET) > > On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, David S. Miller wrote: > > > Why not just put some bitmap pointer into the pci device > > struct. If it is non-NULL, it specifies PCI config space > > areas which have side-effects. > > Or a simple offset beyond which reading data isn't desirable for > whatever reasons. > > I do not think that is sufficient. > > I have seen chips where only one single PCI config space word would > trigger problems, and it was due to a hw bug. The "offset beyond" > scheme would not allow to cover this case. OK. I ignored that such weirdness existed. Gérard.