Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 7 Jan 2007 10:40:49 -0500 | From | "Mark M. Hoffman" <> | Subject | Re: [-mm patch] drivers/pci/quirks.c: cleanup |
| |
Hi Jean, Adrian, et. al.:
* Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> [2007-01-07 12:30:13 +0100]: > Hi Adrian, > > On Sat, 6 Jan 2007 00:29:13 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > While looking at the code, I also noted the following: > > > > quirk_sis_96x_compatible() is pretty useless since all it does is to set > > a static variable that is only used in a printk(). > > > > quirk_sis_96x_compatible() was added with: > > > > > > 2003/05/13 13:48:50-07:00 mhoffman > > [PATCH] i2c: Add SiS96x I2C/SMBus driver > > > > This patch adds support for the SMBus of SiS96x south > > bridges. It is based on i2c-sis645.c from the lm sensors > > project, which never made it into an official kernel and > > was anyway mis-named. > > > > This driver works on my SiS 645/961 board vs w83781d. > > > > > > It's usage in > > > > > > static void __init quirk_sis_503_smbus(struct pci_dev *dev) > > { > > if (sis_96x_compatible) > > quirk_sis_96x_smbus(dev); > > } > > > > > > Was removed in > > > > > > Author: torvalds <torvalds> > > Date: Thu Oct 30 19:03:38 2003 +0000 > > > > Stop SIS 96x chips from lying about themselves. > > > > Some machines with the SIS 96x southbridge have it set up > > to claim it is a SIS 503 chip. That breaks irq routing logic > > among other things. Fix it properly by making everybody aware > > of the duplicity. > > > > > > Was this intentional (and quirk_sis_96x_compatible() should be removed), > > or is this a bug that should be fixed? > > I noticed this too in April 2006, see: > http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/lm-sensors/2006-April/016016.html > > Quoting myself back then: > "The whole sis_96x_compatible stuff looks superfluous now. It was used > before 2.6.0-test10, but we could certainly get rid of it now." > > I do not think there is a bug here, or someone would have complained by > now. Note though that I do not have a SiS-based motherboard to test on. > Mark may be able to help with testing.
It's just cruft from the original quirk. The "compatible" printk could have had value as a diagnostic in case the new quirk didn't work for some reason, but I never saw any complaints about it (apart from the link order problem, which is something different.) It's safe to remove by now.
Regards,
-- Mark M. Hoffman mhoffman@lightlink.com
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |