Update a comment about not numbering pci busses. This may soon be

OBE, but was sitting around in one of my trees for a while...
This commit is contained in:
imp 2008-08-17 17:34:07 +00:00
parent acfcaf8c4d
commit ddd418aba1

View File

@ -293,14 +293,16 @@ pcib_attach_common(device_t dev)
/*
* XXX If the secondary bus number is zero, we should assign a bus number
* since the BIOS hasn't, then initialise the bridge.
*/
/*
* XXX If the subordinate bus number is less than the secondary bus number,
* since the BIOS hasn't, then initialise the bridge. A simple
* bus_alloc_resource with the a couple of busses seems like the right
* approach, but we don't know what busses the BIOS might have already
* assigned to other bridges on this bus that probe later than we do.
*
* If the subordinate bus number is less than the secondary bus number,
* we should pick a better value. One sensible alternative would be to
* pick 255; the only tradeoff here is that configuration transactions
* would be more widely routed than absolutely necessary.
* would be more widely routed than absolutely necessary. We could
* then do a walk of the tree later and fix it.
*/
}
@ -316,7 +318,7 @@ pcib_attach(device_t dev)
child = device_add_child(dev, "pci", sc->secbus);
if (child != NULL)
return(bus_generic_attach(dev));
}
}
/* no secondary bus; we should have fixed this */
return(0);