Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759902AbYC0R7x (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Mar 2008 13:59:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755312AbYC0R7q (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Mar 2008 13:59:46 -0400 Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.152]:34119 "EHLO e34.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755254AbYC0R7p (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Mar 2008 13:59:45 -0400 Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 10:59:12 -0700 From: Gary Hade To: Ingo Molnar Cc: yhlu.kernel@gmail.com, Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , Andrew Morton , Gary Hade , Greg Kroah-Hartman , kernel list Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/pci: add pci=skip_isa_align command lines. Message-ID: <20080327175912.GA9684@us.ibm.com> References: <200803270131.18885.yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> <20080327084557.GH15626@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080327084557.GH15626@elte.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1935 Lines: 48 On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 09:45:57AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Yinghai Lu wrote: > > > [PATCH] x86/pci: add pci=skip_isa_align command lines. > > > > so we don't align the io port start address for pci cards. > > > > also move out dmi check out acpi.c, because it has nothing to do with > > acpi. it could spare some calling when we have several peer root > > buses. > > i like this feature, and i've applied your patch to x86.git for testing, > but i'd like to hear what the ACPI and PCI guys think about this. > > Also, we should try as hard as possible to make it a blacklist instead > of a whitelist? It would be cool to support more PCI cards/devices on > all new(-ish) systems by default and if we didnt have to maintain the > DMI whitelist for eternity. (a whitelist will always be incomplete and > will lag behind reality) Ingo, This is a great idea. I was the guy that added the whitelist and ISA alignment avoidance code but have also been concerned about the headache of keeping whitelist current in mainline and Distro releases as new systems are introduced. When I made the change I assumed (appearently incorrectly) that there were way too many existing systems requiring the alignment to even consider the blacklist approach. Do you have any suggestions on how to identify systems to include in the blacklist? ...or would we just boldly make non-alignment the default, provide an empty blacklist, and let breakage identify those systems that need to be blacklisted? Thanks. Gary -- Gary Hade System x Enablement IBM Linux Technology Center 503-578-4503 IBM T/L: 775-4503 garyhade@us.ibm.com http://www.ibm.com/linux/ltc -- 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/