Re: HPET regression in 2.6.26 versus 2.6.25 -- found another user with the same regression

["Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 12:31 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
> * Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> this one should work. please apply this one only.
>>
>> YH
>>
>> [PATCH] x86: check hpet with BAR v2
>
> great. I've cleaned it up a bit (see the final commit below) and queued
> it up in tip/x86/urgent for some testing. But there are a few open
> questions, and an Ack/feedback from Jesse/Linus would be nice as well:
>
> - the forced insertion and the embedded knowledge about iomem_resource
>  and ioport_resource looks ugly to me.
>
> - we should also extend this to other platform resource types that we
>  know about: ioapic address(es) might be a prime candidate. (local
>  APICs are CPU entities and should never show up as PCI devices) The
>  mmconfig range is already properly accounted for by the PCI code
>  itself, right?

please check v3

>
> - plus a more highlevel approach would be nice as well i think - making
>  sure that the hpet driver runs before any of the PCI code, and
>  inserting a special "sticky" resource there which would keep any
>  potential followup generic PCI resource that overlaps this resource
>  untouched. (with a proper kernel warning emitted as well - such
>  situations are likely BIOS bugs.)

yes, can remove that late_initcall tricky code to insert resource for
lapic and ioapic, and mmconfig etc.

YH