Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757123Ab0GNSTw (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Jul 2010 14:19:52 -0400 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:7848 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756680Ab0GNSTv convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Jul 2010 14:19:51 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.55,202,1278313200"; d="scan'208";a="586103780" From: "Pan, Jacob jun" To: Ben Greear CC: Robert Hancock , linux-kernel , "jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org" , "H. Peter Anvin" Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2010 11:19:45 -0700 Subject: RE: Regression: 2.6.34 boot fails on E5405 system, bisected: de08e2c26 Thread-Topic: Regression: 2.6.34 boot fails on E5405 system, bisected: de08e2c26 Thread-Index: Acsjdvppx/jJO+oeTY63+nLsCJ5gJgACW8ag Message-ID: <43F901BD926A4E43B106BF17856F0755EA8EEA18@orsmsx508.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <4C3D067C.10507@candelatech.com> <4C3D101E.5010605@candelatech.com> <4C3D1942.1090207@gmail.com> <4C3D1F82.1040907@candelatech.com> <4C3DC64F.5040505@candelatech.com> <43F901BD926A4E43B106BF17856F0755EA8EE7E2@orsmsx508.amr.corp.intel.com> <4C3DEEAB.8090106@candelatech.com> In-Reply-To: <4C3DEEAB.8090106@candelatech.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1270 Lines: 41 >-----Original Message----- >From: Ben Greear [mailto:greearb@candelatech.com] >Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 10:07 AM >To: Pan, Jacob jun >Cc: Robert Hancock; linux-kernel; jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org >Subject: Re: Regression: 2.6.34 boot fails on E5405 system, bisected: >de08e2c26 > >On 07/14/2010 08:36 AM, Pan, Jacob jun wrote: >> what is the config size of 10.1? >> ls -l /sys/bus/pci/devices/0000:00:10.1/config >> >> if that is 256, it might be related to this patch. > >That patch is already in 2.6.34.y (with slight white-space >change it seems: space before <). > >I just posted a patch to lkml that fixes the problem for me, >based on a suggestion by Robert Hancock. > >I think this or something similar should to go 2.6.34.y stable >as well. > I have not seen the patch yet, but there is no guarantee that capabilities are always laid out in ascending address. So I think we cannot bail out when pcie_cap >> 20 <= pos If that is some bug in the config space, can we fix it with some quirks? Thanks, Jacob -- 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/