[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081128143346.GF28138@elte.hu>
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2008 15:33:46 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>
Cc: kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: aperture_64.c: clarify that too small aperture is valid reason
for this code
* Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz> wrote:
> Clarify that too small aperture is valid reason for this code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c
> index 9a32b37..026fcfb 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c
> @@ -1,8 +1,9 @@
> /*
> * Firmware replacement code.
> *
> - * Work around broken BIOSes that don't set an aperture or only set the
> - * aperture in the AGP bridge.
> + * Work around broken BIOSes that don't set an aperture, only set the
> + * aperture in the AGP bridge, or set too small aperture.
> + *
applied to tip/x86/iommu, thanks Pavel!
That comment is indeed highly misleading - and sets the wrong mindset for
people who start reading this file. The list you add it to are indeed the
most common reasons for us to (re-)allocate the aperture.
Would you be interested in sending a patch for a full list of situations
where we declare the existing aperture invalid and reallocate it? It will
certainly help understanding the purpose and role of this file.
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists