On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 07:06:59PM +0000, Mario.Limonciello@xxxxxxxx wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Bjorn Helgaas [mailto:helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx] > > Sent: Friday, February 23, 2018 11:26 AM > > To: Limonciello, Mario <Mario_Limonciello@xxxxxxxx> > > Cc: bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx; rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; > > andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; lenb@xxxxxxxxxx; michael.jamet@xxxxxxxxx; > > yehezkel.bernat@xxxxxxxxx; linux-acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- > > pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] PCI: Make sure all bridges reserve at least one bus > > number > > > > On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 12:52:18AM +0000, Mario.Limonciello@xxxxxxxx wrote: > > > On Feb 22, 2018 18:27, Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 05:39:55PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > > > > When distributing extra buses between hotplug bridges we need to make > > > > > sure each bridge reserve at least one bus number, even if there is > > > > > currently nothing connected to it. For instance ACPI hotplug may bring > > > > > in additional devices to non-hotplug bridges later on. To make sure we > > > > > don't run out of bus numbers for non-hotplug bridges reserve one bus > > > > > number for them upfront before distributing buses for hotplug bridges. > > > > > > > > > > Fixes: 1c02ea810065 ("PCI: Distribute available buses to hotplug-capable > > bridges") > > > > > Reported-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > Is there a bugzilla or email URL we can include here? > > > > > > Sorry it was private communication that I believe Mika is referring to in Reported- > > By here. > > > > > > You can remove the tag if you think it's inappropriate for this commit. > > > > I like to give credit whenever possible, so I wouldn't necessarily > > remove the Reported-by. > > > > But it would be very useful to also have a URL to something with more > > details, e.g., what sort of failure the user would observe, dmesg > > logs, PCI topology, etc. > > > > This information can certainly be redacted to remove any proprietary > > things that can't be made public. Usually that isn't of interest to > > structural issues like this anyway. > > It was a result of a very long communication chain, but I think I pulled > out the relevant details here if you would like a URL to include: > https://gist.github.com/superm1/100a2ed20449f684ebb84c392e35dbed Thanks Mario. I'll update changelog to include the above information as well. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
