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