[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPcyv4jaqqgvjQC+QKvUohM7mAXAsZKbKntCEaiTozCCqwmFyA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 17:03:00 -0800
From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Boaz Harrosh <boaz@...xistor.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...ux.intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Roger C. Pao" <rcpao.enmotus@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...1.01.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [Linux-nvdimm] [PATCH 0/2] e820: Fix handling of NvDIMM chips
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:15:32AM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
>> In fact it was originally "type-6" until ACPI 5 claimed that number
>> for official use, so these platforms, with early proof-of-concept
>> nvdimm support, have already gone through one transition to a new
>> number. They need to do the same once an official number for nvdimm
>> support is published.
>>
>> Put another way, these early platforms are already using out-of-tree
>> patches for nvdimm enabling. They can continue to do so, or switch to
>> standard methods when the standard is published.
>
> Not supporting hardware that is widely avaiable (I have some, too)
> is not very user friendly.
Yes, as I agreed with Ingo, allowing a driver to assume control of an
unknown memory type with a warning or a kernel taint seems fine.
--
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