[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20091209190649I.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2009 19:07:39 +0900
From: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
To: amwang@...hat.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
gcosta@...hat.com, mingo@...e.hu
Subject: Re: [Patch] i386: remove 'usedac' kernel parameter
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 01:25:48 -0500
Amerigo Wang <amwang@...hat.com> wrote:
> It is scheduled to be removed.
>
> Signed-off-by: WANG Cong <amwang@...hat.com>
> Cc: Glauber Costa <gcosta@...hat.com>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
>
> ---
> diff --git a/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt b/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt
> index 591e944..8c895f6 100644
> --- a/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt
> @@ -291,13 +291,6 @@ Who: Michael Buesch <mb@...sch.de>
>
> ---------------------------
>
> -What: usedac i386 kernel parameter
> -When: 2.6.27
> -Why: replaced by allowdac and no dac combination
> -Who: Glauber Costa <gcosta@...hat.com>
> -
> ----------------------------
> -
I'm not sure about the above description, I'm not against removing
this option though.
IIUC, the usedac option enables us to stop via_no_dac() setting
forbid_dac to 1. That is, someone who uses VIA bridges can use DAC
with this option even if some of VIA bridges seem to be broken about
DAC. I can't see how we can do the same thing with "allowdac" and
"nodac" combination.
--
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