Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932193AbVJQS2g (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Oct 2005 14:28:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932202AbVJQS2g (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Oct 2005 14:28:36 -0400 Received: from mx3.actcom.co.il ([192.114.47.65]:45452 "EHLO smtp3.actcom.co.il") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932193AbVJQS2f (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Oct 2005 14:28:35 -0400 Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 20:27:55 +0200 From: Muli Ben-Yehuda To: Andi Kleen Cc: discuss@x86-64.org, Ravikiran G Thirumalai , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, shai@scalex86.org, clameter@engr.sgi.com Subject: Re: [discuss] Re: x86_64: 2.6.14-rc4 swiotlb broken Message-ID: <20051017182755.GA26239@granada.merseine.nu> References: <20051017093654.GA7652@localhost.localdomain> <200510171740.57614.ak@suse.de> <20051017175231.GA4959@localhost.localdomain> <200510172008.24669.ak@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200510172008.24669.ak@suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1392 Lines: 41 On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 08:08:24PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Monday 17 October 2005 19:52, Ravikiran G Thirumalai wrote: > > > No they are not. IBM X460s are generally available machines and the bug > > affects those boxes. > > No reports from that front so far. We have such machines with >4GB memory and 32 bit DMA capable SCSI controllers and would like to be able to run 2.6.14 on them when it comes out... > > How can there be a major kernel release which is known > > to have breakage?? > > Welcome to the painful real world of software engineering. > > Every software has bugs and if you want to ever get a release out you > have to make such decisions sometimes. Fair enough, but this is a regression for something that used to work. If a painful choice is required, how about reverting the patch that broke it and breaking something that used to be broken? > As an alternative I can just backout the patch that enables the Intel > SRAT code. That is probably better for a short term fix and will > not regress anybody. Sounds great! Cheers, Muli -- Muli Ben-Yehuda http://www.mulix.org | http://mulix.livejournal.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/