[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101206124423.0868b71e@jbarnes-desktop>
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 12:44:23 -0800
From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>
To: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>
Cc: "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kenji Kaneshige <kaneshige.kenji@...fujitsu.com>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
Max Asbock <masbock@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"indou.takao@...fujitsu.com" <indou.takao@...fujitsu.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
"stable@...nel.org" <stable@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/4] vt-d: quirk for masking vtd spec errors to platform
error handling logic
On Mon, 06 Dec 2010 12:26:30 -0800
Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 09:27 -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > Can we make these registers and bits a bit more self-documenting (i.e.
> > #defines for both, maybe along with other useful bit definitions for
> > this reg)? Also, "error" is misspelled as "erorr" above. :)
>
> Thanks for the review. Appended the updated patch. I haven't used
> #defines for the pci-id's, as the first one (IOH) is used by several
> chipsets and the second one is not named yet.
Is there a bug # that should be referenced in the commit log? Any
tested-bys to add?
Thanks,
--
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
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