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: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Gary Hade <garyhade@us.ibm.com>, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>,
	Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/pci: don't use crs for root if we only have one root bus
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 16:54:08 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.01.0906241645300.3605@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090624163705.0389c8f0@jbarnes-g45>



On Wed, 24 Jun 2009, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> 
> Yeah, I think it's reasonable to revert, especially given how we do
> _CRS handling currently.  I'm hoping at some point we can use the _CRS
> data to at least augment the configuration we get from hardware, since
> on some machines it seems to be necessary.

Agreed. I do think we should take _CRS into account - possibly just as a 
minimal hint to determine which root buses to try to scan (maybe we do 
this already, I really didn't check). Or maybe we could use it to extend 
on our scan information.

But when it seems to have things like "this bus can forward VGA cycles" 
kind of "resources" (which seems to be the main reason Larry Finger has so 
many of them), then that's just worthless knowledge that we're much better 
off just determining on our own.

Anyway, I may feel pretty strongly about things like this, but I'm also 
open to being convinced otherwise for 2.6.32. I wanted to do -rc1 today 
(it's been more than two weeks), and while I don't expect -rc1 to be 
flawless, I also hate to release it with _known_ bugs.

So partly due to timing, I'd rather revert it, and we can revisit it for 
the next release - whatever the actual end result then will be.

[ There's a difference between "we're supposed to find and fix bugs in the 
  -rc series", and "I release known-buggy -rc1's since we're supposed to 
  fix it later". For similar reasons, I hate pulling known-buggy stuff 
  during the merge window - it's ok if it shows itself to be buggy 
  _later_, but if people send me stuff that they know is buggy as they 
  send it to me, then that's a problem. ]

		Linus

  reply	other threads:[~2009-06-24 23:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20090624122433.GA24781@elte.hu>
     [not found] ` <20090624145119.GA12664@elte.hu>
2009-06-24 21:46   ` [PATCH] x86: fix _CRS resources return handling Yinghai Lu
2009-06-24 21:48     ` [PATCH] x86/pci: get root CRS before scan child -v2 Yinghai Lu
2009-06-24 22:37       ` Jesse Barnes
2009-06-25  0:03         ` Yinghai
2009-06-24 22:58     ` [PATCH] x86/pci: don't use crs for root if we only have one root bus Yinghai Lu
2009-06-24 23:09       ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-24 23:21         ` Linus Torvalds
2009-06-24 23:37           ` Jesse Barnes
2009-06-24 23:54             ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2009-06-25  0:01               ` Jesse Barnes
2009-06-25  7:03                 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-25  7:28                   ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-06-25 16:28                   ` Jesse Barnes
2009-06-25  0:00         ` Gary Hade
2009-06-25  2:01     ` [PATCH 1/3] x86/pci: fix boundary checking when using root CRS Yinghai Lu
2009-06-25  2:02       ` [PATCH 2/3] x86/pci: get root CRS before scan childs -v3 Yinghai Lu
2009-06-25  3:00         ` [PATCH 2/3] x86/pci: get root CRS before scan childs -v4 Yinghai Lu
2009-06-30  1:16       ` [PATCH 1/3] x86/pci: fix boundary checking when using root CRS Jesse Barnes
2009-06-30 18:04         ` Gary Hade
2009-06-30 21:00           ` Jesse Barnes

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.2.01.0906241645300.3605@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=garyhade@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=jaswinder@kernel.org \
    --cc=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=matthew@wil.cx \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=yinghai@kernel.org \
    /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®