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? > > - *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. Linus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
