On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 7:16 PM, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > 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? yes. > >> > - *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. i see. YH -- 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
