Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758626AbXJYMGU (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Oct 2007 08:06:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754804AbXJYMGJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Oct 2007 08:06:09 -0400 Received: from emerald.lightlink.com ([205.232.34.14]:28797 "EHLO emerald.lightlink.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752997AbXJYMGI (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Oct 2007 08:06:08 -0400 Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 08:04:38 -0400 From: "Mark M. Hoffman" To: Thomas Renninger Cc: linux-acpi , linux-kernel , Len Brown , Andrew Morton , Jean Delvare Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Detect hwmon and i2c bus drivers interfering with ACPI Operation Region resources Message-ID: <20071025120438.GJ30546@jupiter.solarsys.private> References: <1193236319.4590.225.camel@queen.suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1193236319.4590.225.camel@queen.suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1811 Lines: 48 Hi Thomas: I recently told someone in private that ACPI vs. hwmon conflicts are the biggest open problems for the hwmon subsystem. Thank you (and Jean) for doing this. * Thomas Renninger [2007-10-24 16:31:59 +0200]: > Hi, > > it seems Len's test tree and Linus tree diverged a bit, at least with > this patch set things do not apply cleanly. > > Therefore I post these for discussion whether and in which kernel tree > they should end up before doing work for nothing. > If they are still a candidate for 2.6.24 (rather unintrusive), pls tell > me whether and when I should base them against Len's test/release branch > or whatever other tree. > If not, it would be great if they can be included into the -mm tree and > I can rebase them against this one. Andrew has already picked this series; I vote for extended time in -mm. On the hwmon side, there is almost guaranteed to be fallout from this that may take time to resolve. > (...) > A boot parameter acpi_enforce_resources=strict/lax/no is provided, which > is default set to lax: > - strict: let conflicting drivers fail to load with an error message > - lax: let conflicting driver work normal with a warning message > - no: no functional change at all > Depending on the feedback and the kind of interferences we see, this > should be set to strict at later time. As long as it's in -mm, you may as well default to =strict right away. This will force people to report. Open the floodgates; I hope I don't drown. 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/