[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4C9A6534.3060800@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 13:21:08 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>
CC: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@...gle.com>,
Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
Simon Arlott <simon@...e.lp0.eu>, x86@...nel.org,
Clemens Ladisch <clemens@...isch.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Marc Jones <marcj303@...il.com>,
Jordan Crouse <jcrouse@...eaurora.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, HPET: ignore any PCI BARs that match an HPET we
already know about
On 09/22/2010 01:19 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 22, 2010 02:15:47 pm Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>
>> We often discover the HPET early, via the static ACPI HPET table, before
>> enumerating PCI devices. If the HPET is implemented as a PCI function,
>> we will discover it again during PCI device enumeration. We must ignore
>> the PCI function so we don't inadvertently move it out from under the
>> driver.
>>
>> I think it's better to ignore *any* PCI BAR that matches a previously
>> discovered HPET; that way we don't need platform-specific knowledge,
>> and we won't have to add more quirks for future machines.
>>
>> This is for a regression from 2.6.34, but the reporter has been
>> unable to test it yet.
>>
>> Reference: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18482
>
> I've tried hard to find somebody who can test this, but nobody who
> can reproduce the original failure has been able to test it. I
> propose that we put it in linux-next and see what happens there.
>
Makes sense to me.
-hpa
--
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