On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 05:36:43PM -0500, Tony Camuso wrote: > Greg KH wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 01:25:57PM -0500, Tony Camuso wrote: >> Any reason why these changes were never submitted to the upstream kernel >> versions? Or do you all just want to keep patching your newer releases >> with this information forever? :) > > I really don't know why these changes were never submitted to the > upstream kernel versions". > > I was brought on the scene about six months ago as HP's on-site engineer > at RH, and this was one of the things they wanted me to do. > > We wanted a solution that was more generic and could manage this > problem preemptively, rather than using blacklists. Maintenance of > blacklists is a bother and almost always done after a new system > with this problem is discovered. > > Furthermore, blacklisting whole platforms to use legacy pci config > penalizes any mmconfig-friendly buses in those platforms, particularly > the pci express buses, and causes such platforms to be non-compliant > with the pci expres spec.
Sure, I realize this, but it solves the problem in one way for broken hardware, such that it at least allows it to work, right? It also provides a better incentive for the manufacturer to fix their bios, which as you are on-site at HP, it would seem odd that they would just not do that instead of trying to work around this in the kernel... thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
