Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761834AbXLTWoV (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:44:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755566AbXLTWoL (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:44:11 -0500 Received: from ns2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:54301 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754133AbXLTWoI (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Dec 2007 17:44:08 -0500 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 14:40:06 -0800 From: Greg KH To: Tony Camuso Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [PATCH 0/5]PCI: x86 MMCONFIG] Message-ID: <20071220224006.GA16855@suse.de> References: <476A5FD0.4010804@redhat.com> <20071220172205.GB5636@suse.de> <476AB3B5.9080808@redhat.com> <20071220215719.GA8528@suse.de> <476AEE7B.6050708@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <476AEE7B.6050708@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1660 Lines: 37 On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 05:36:43PM -0500, Tony Camuso wrote: > Greg KH wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 01:25:57PM -0500, Tony Camuso wrote: >> Any reason why these changes were never submitted to the upstream kernel >> versions? Or do you all just want to keep patching your newer releases >> with this information forever? :) > > I really don't know why these changes were never submitted to the > upstream kernel versions". > > I was brought on the scene about six months ago as HP's on-site engineer > at RH, and this was one of the things they wanted me to do. > > We wanted a solution that was more generic and could manage this > problem preemptively, rather than using blacklists. Maintenance of > blacklists is a bother and almost always done after a new system > with this problem is discovered. > > Furthermore, blacklisting whole platforms to use legacy pci config > penalizes any mmconfig-friendly buses in those platforms, particularly > the pci express buses, and causes such platforms to be non-compliant > with the pci expres spec. Sure, I realize this, but it solves the problem in one way for broken hardware, such that it at least allows it to work, right? It also provides a better incentive for the manufacturer to fix their bios, which as you are on-site at HP, it would seem odd that they would just not do that instead of trying to work around this in the kernel... thanks, greg k-h -- 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/