mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>,
	kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Gary Hade <garyhade@us.ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: regression fixed by using pci=rom
Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 18:46:37 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0805081842030.2940@woody.linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200805081717.54102.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>



On Thu, 8 May 2008, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> 
> Hm, yeah in many cases we definitely *do* want to try to get the expansion ROM 
> space allocated.  But maybe it should be a lower priority than other BARs...  
> Gary?

The thing is, a lot of these things have been done this way because not 
doing them that way breaks.

We want to allocate expansion ROM space - even if we don't enable it - 
because not doing so will screw up bus sizing etc, and can make it 
impossible to allocate later.

In general, changing PCI allocation strategy is really _really_ dangerous, 
even when it is "right", because it tends to expose a lot of issues where 
something worked just because it was perhaps indirectly causing a layout 
that worked.

So the reason I immediately reverted this is that it was simply totally 
wrong. If somebody cares about multi-node systems, the onus of making 
those work should be on *that*, not on old systems that already work.

Ingo, Thomas: I would _seriously_ suggest that you don't consider the x86 
PCI setup code to be "x86" code. Because it isn't. Not in that sense. Just 
don't take patches to it.

		Linus

  reply	other threads:[~2008-05-09  1:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-05-08 23:54 Dave Airlie
2008-05-09  0:17 ` Jesse Barnes
2008-05-09  1:46   ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2008-05-09  6:29     ` Jesse Barnes
2008-05-09 16:05       ` Gary Hade
2008-05-09  6:44     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-05-09 16:45       ` Gary Hade
2008-05-09 17:26         ` Linus Torvalds
2008-05-09 18:54           ` Gary Hade
2008-05-09  1:36 ` Linus Torvalds

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=alpine.LFD.1.10.0805081842030.2940@woody.linux-foundation.org \
    --to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=airlied@gmail.com \
    --cc=garyhade@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®