[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAErSpo7pEh=_QSpdN3Q-vzPY3dkKW0yXuB4FM4SxZ7CnSVn5Gw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 16:21:09 -0600
From: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, Daniel Yeisley <dan.yeisley@...sys.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] PCI: reimplement P2P bridge 1K I/O windows (Intel P64H2)
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com> wrote:
>>
>> Note that the bridge window assignment code, e.g., pbus_size_io(), should
>> pay attention to dev->io_window_1k, too, but I didn't fix that.
>
> Please check attached patch that will fix pbus_size_io.
Thanks for posting this again. I had looked for it, but couldn't find it.
> You may fold the patch in your patch, or could split your patch to
> two. First one
> only add io_window_1k, and second one will use io_window_1k. Then could put my
> patch between them.
What bad things would happen if I just appended your patch to the end
of this series? Would that break bisection in some scenario?
Bjorn
--
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