Port-i386 archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: x86 pcitag_t change proposal/patch




To: Jonathan A. Kollasch <jakllsch%kollasch.net@localhost>

Subject: Re: x86 pcitag_t change proposal/patch

From: Matt Thomas <matt%3am-software.com@localhost>

Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 15:05:31 -0800


On Dec 5, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Jonathan A. Kollasch wrote:

> Round 2:
> 
> Use more descriptive pcitag_t structure member names and add comment
> updates.
> 
> I did not change the use of bitfields in pcitag_t because they are not
> used with the hardware.
> <pcitag-diff-1.txt>

I still don't like use of bitfields.  in 99% of the cases the tag will be or'ed 
with the register number and bitfields prevent that.




References:

x86 pcitag_t change proposal/patch
From: Jonathan A. Kollasch

Re: x86 pcitag_t change proposal/patch
From: Jonathan A. Kollasch




Prev by Date: Re: x86 pcitag_t change proposal/patch

Next by Date: Re: x86 pcitag_t change proposal/patch

Previous by Thread: Re: x86 pcitag_t change proposal/patch

Next by Thread: Re: x86 pcitag_t change proposal/patch

Indexes:

reverse Date

reverse Thread

Old Index



Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index