Talk:PCI configuration space

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the PCI configuration space article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Computer hardware task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Plug and Play

I am removing this line because everything it implies is misleading: "The useful feature was marketed by Intel with the name Plug and play."

First of all, many technologies were marketed under the term plug-and-play (ISA, USB, etc.) so it is misleading to make it look like PCI is at all special in this regard. Secondly, Intel was/is a provider and yes the developer of the technology which they "released" to an independent form. Thus every Intel competitor could use PCI and market it however they pleased, so it is misleading to mention Intel specifically as an entity marketing PCI. Thirdly, PCI is/was a feature of Intel South Bridge chipsets which Intel has never marketed, so it is probably a complete falsification to claim Intel marketed PCI at all. Intel marketing strategy has always been aimed around the processor itself and not on the supporting cast of characters.--Riluve (talk) 17:40, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The "don't care address"?

In Bus_enumeration, the article says "...reads back the device's requested memory size in the form of 0s where the don't care address is." The term "don't care address" seems unlikely to me. Is it correct? 79.79.96.213 (talk) 11:33, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple issues??

Hi, thank you for your concern to make Wikipedia better. Someone's put a "multiple issues" banner on the page; it's not quite clear to me why. The issues listed on this talk page are rather minor and there's really only two. I found the page a good help getting started on programming for PCI. I didn't write the page so I have no other interest in it than helping others to benefit from it. The banner makes the page seem less useful or reliable than it actually is. Please consider resolving those two issues and / or removing the banner. Thanks! 78.22.161.165 (talk) 18:35, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[edit 19 July] The banner mentions two other problems: 'lead section MAY be too short' and 'needs additional citations'. Indeed, the link provided with the first problem leads to the "length" section of the Lead Section page. The lead section, however, in fact quite adequately says what the page is about, and the following Overview Section elaborates on this with more in-depth information. It seems to me that a rash decision was made here, solely based on an observation of the length of the lead section without much attention to its content. Re. the second problem, the citations provided seem sufficient to me. I propose to remove the banner end of July, unless someone thinks that it should stay.

[edit 02 Aug.] Removed banner.