Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758043AbYH3C3S (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Aug 2008 22:29:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754716AbYH3C3H (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Aug 2008 22:29:07 -0400 Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com ([209.85.198.233]:41231 "EHLO rv-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754555AbYH3C3G (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Aug 2008 22:29:06 -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=X0G4JKmwr+9bj636ARmzvdU2EH9fpccLo0FACtt1Ws74BMUw53IUAmSSYlOuemJk/1 mgcwhUaviE3X9TcnKSOJDiw3ZJT98qMgpKDGZI/8tjQ+V9CKaTWwPRGQLC0tLLyewHze h6mE/EdvupR4ce+x8N8gvYlAYEn5HdC32N7bE= Message-ID: <86802c440808291929r64c4dd15td5214a9199618815@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 19:29:04 -0700 From: "Yinghai Lu" To: "Linus Torvalds" Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.27-rc5: System boot regression caused by commit a2bd7274b47124d2fc4dfdb8c0591f545ba749dd Cc: "Jordan Crouse" , "David Witbrodt" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "Linux Kernel Mailing List" , "Jeff Garzik" , "Tejun Heo" , "Ingo Molnar" , "Andrew Morton" , "Kernel Testers" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200808292157.24179.rjw@sisk.pl> <86802c440808291413t4f31993fmba59a65aefd906ca@mail.gmail.com> <200808300031.16708.rjw@sisk.pl> <86802c440808291624t2bd0229w2da36dfc6c794b18@mail.gmail.com> <86802c440808291711t32d3e76dsf804856b0a8f4939@mail.gmail.com> <86802c440808291814v4037f83eu943b9ad23297309b@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1612 Lines: 51 On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 7:16 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Fri, 29 Aug 2008, Yinghai Lu wrote: >> > Ok, can we please >> > >> > - *do* get a quirk for known-broken chipsets (at a *PCI* level, this is >> > not an x86 issue) >> >> the quirk work at the first point for David' system. > > That was not what I meant - meant the known-broken MMIO bar. > >> [PATCH] x86: protect hpet in BAR for one ATI chipset v3 > > Now, this is probably fine too in theory, but > > - you didn't check if the BAR is even enabled, afaik > > - the other patch - to move the reserved e820 range later - should make > this pointless, no? yes. > >> > - *not* get any more random PCI work-arounds that go through the x86 tree >> > and aren't even looked at by the (very few) people who actually >> > understand the PCI resource handling? >> >> stop working on following path? >> [PATCH] x86: split e820 reserved entries record to late v4 >> [PATCH] x86: split e820 reserved entries record to late v4 - fix v2 > > No, I think this is worth doing, BUT IT MUST NOT BE MERGED BY JUST SENDING > IT TO INGO. > > It's not an "x86 patch". It's about the PCI resources. > > And those kinds of patches need to be acked by people who know and > understand the PCI resource issues and have some memory of just how > broken machines can exist. i see. 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/