linux-kernel - Re: [git pull] PCI changes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 13 Jan 2012 15:14:21 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
Cc:	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [git pull] PCI changes

On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org> wrote:
>>
>> So why is acpi_pci_root_add() special? Cna you explain that part to me?
>
> pcie_no_aspm() means "Do not permit ASPM to be enabled" - it doesn't
> alter the existing state. pcie_clear_aspm() does that.

I *know*.

So look again.

Why is acpi_pci_root_add() special?

Because dammit, it does exactly that pcie_clear_aspm() for the
ACPI_FADT_NO_ASPM case.

That was my question.  Why does it do that, when the commit log (and
the other users) say that ACPI_FADT_NO_ASPM means "don't touch".

It touches.

               Linus
--
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/