Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754752AbYAIJe1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jan 2008 04:34:27 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751746AbYAIJeO (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jan 2008 04:34:14 -0500 Received: from hpsmtp-eml17.kpnxchange.com ([213.75.38.117]:11658 "EHLO hpsmtp-eml17.kpnxchange.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751306AbYAIJeM (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jan 2008 04:34:12 -0500 To: Len Brown Subject: Re: pnpacpi : exceeded the max number of IO resources Cc: akpm@osdl.org, bjorn.helgaas@hp.com, cholvenstot@comcast.net, hidave.darkstar@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rene.herman@keyaccess.nl, shaohua.li@intel.com, trenn@suse.de, yakui.zhao@intel.com In-reply-To: <200801082250.51026.lenb@kernel.org> References: <1196428488.7066.6.camel@localhost> <47508D3C.9050507@keyaccess.nl> <475436A3.90906@keyaccess.nl> <200801082250.51026.lenb@kernel.org> Message-Id: From: Frans Pop Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:34:09 +0100 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jan 2008 09:34:09.0339 (UTC) FILETIME=[C92CB8B0:01C852A2] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1634 Lines: 39 Len Brown wrote: >> > Well, yes, the warning is actually new as well. Previously your kernel >> > just silently ignored 8 more mem resources than it does now it seems. >> > >> > Given that people are hitting these limits, it might make sense to just >> > do away with the warning for 2.6.24 again while waiting for the dynamic >> > code? >> >> Ping. Should these warnings be reverted for 2.6.24? > > No. I don't think hiding this issue again is a good idea. > I'd rather live with people complaining about an addition dmesg line. We're not talking about "a" additional line. In my case [1] we're talking about 22 (!) additional identical lines. Not fixing this before 2.6.24 seems completely inconsistent: - either this is a real bug and the ERR level message is correct, in which case the limits should be increased; - or hitting the limits is harmless and the message should be changed to DEBUG level. It is great to hear that the memory allocation will become dynamic in the future and maybe that could just justify your standpoint, but having the messages is damn ugly and alarming from a user point of view. Please keep in mind that depending on distro release schedules, 2.6.24 could live for quite a bit longer than just the period needed to release 2.6.25 (if that is when the dynamic allocation will be implemented). Cheers, FJP [1] http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/1/6/279 -- 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/