Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752894AbYGSF2S (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Jul 2008 01:28:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750719AbYGSF2G (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Jul 2008 01:28:06 -0400 Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com ([209.85.198.228]:8904 "EHLO rv-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751128AbYGSF2F (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Jul 2008 01:28:05 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=MHhPwg3aqM1yLzpfzaBBYUW9rO3BNpWvAzCYomrtaan0wnaww1p8pIfw1qv5eQRQRS BkhTT7U1WNXLaocb12Y1tbhg7Tkw2a8A1b+tlJkfWcBANLMSh1L+xwHpsnbK5OfzU1vy z3zYWsv0cyWmGTdSjX2JDgu5F5IQBTpJI8Dro= Message-ID: <86802c440807182228u5259eba1x238ec3af5fc4324c@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 22:28:03 -0700 From: "Yinghai Lu" To: "Jack Howarth" , "Barnes, Jesse" Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86,pci: dmi check for mackpro 2.2 mmconf Cc: "Ingo Molnar" , "Thomas Gleixner" , "H. Peter Anvin" , jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20080719051227.GA10044@bromo.msbb.uc.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200807180941.09779.yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> <20080718202118.GC24122@elte.hu> <86802c440807181326l489b7763sdb040f5b6e575d8c@mail.gmail.com> <20080719005849.GA9055@bromo.msbb.uc.edu> <86802c440807181822l5138ff85k7d8c2e2702a11025@mail.gmail.com> <20080719032845.GA9662@bromo.msbb.uc.edu> <86802c440807182145s58ce6cb2xfc85a6fc849a2a73@mail.gmail.com> <20080719051227.GA10044@bromo.msbb.uc.edu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 788 Lines: 20 On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:12 PM, Jack Howarth wrote: > Would that imply that this might be more fallout of the BIOS bug in the > MacBook Pro where insufficient address space is reserved for the number of > buses claimed? that is good enough with 64 buses like laptop. > Is there some point in the PCIEASPM based code where you > could duplicate the same sort of fix? I would be happy to test any debug > patches that might help pinpoint where such a fix is needed. Jesse, who is maintainer for ASPM code? YH -- 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/