Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754722Ab3I0VrG (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Sep 2013 17:47:06 -0400 Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:41270 "EHLO gate.crashing.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753879Ab3I0VrE (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Sep 2013 17:47:04 -0400 Message-ID: <1380318405.27811.37.camel@pasglop> Subject: Re: Please revert 928bea964827d7824b548c1f8e06eccbbc4d0d7d From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Yinghai Lu , Bjorn Helgaas , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" , linuxppc-dev , Linux Kernel list Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2013 07:46:45 +1000 In-Reply-To: References: <1380270519.27811.10.camel@pasglop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.6.4-0ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 926 Lines: 26 On Fri, 2013-09-27 at 10:10 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > So i would like to use the first way that you suggest : call pci_set_master > > PCIe port driver. > > So I have to say, that if we can fix this with just adding a single > new pci_set_master() call, we should do that before we decide to > revert. > > If other, bigger issues then come up, we can decide to revert. But if > there's a one-liner fix, let's just do that first, ok? > > Mind sending a patch? Wouldn't it be better to simply have pci_enable_device() always set bus master on a bridge? I don't see any case where it makes sense to have an enabled bridge without the master bit set on it... Cheers, Ben. -- 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/