On 09/15/2017 01:51 PM, Luca Coelho wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-09-15 at 13:48 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 09/15/2017 01:38 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 12:32 PM, Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> In any case, your patch introduces a regression on systems. Please get
>>>>> it reverted now, and then you can come up with a new approach to fix the
>>>>> double enable of the upstream bridge.
>>>>
>>>> Who's sending in the revert? I can certainly do it if no one else does,
>>>> but it needs to be done.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not seeing any patches coming out of Srinath to fix up the
>>>> situation, so we should revert the broken patch until a better solution
>>>> exists.
>>>
>>> Hmm. I don't have the history here (apparently it never made lkml, for
>>> example), so I don't even know which commit you're talking about.
>>>
>>> From some of the context it looks like commit 40f11adc7cd9 ("PCI:
>>> Avoid race while enabling upstream bridges"), is that correct?
>>
>> Yes, Luca says that Bjorn already sent in the revert request, I just
>> didn't see it since I wasn't CC'ed on it. So looks like we're all
>> good, provided that makes it into -rc1. 40f11adc7cd9 is the broken
>> commit.
>
> Strange... AFAICT you *were* CCed on it. And so was everyone else in
> the original thread (+LKML)...
Hmm, never showed up here. Very odd!
--
Jens Axboe
