Hi Bjorn,
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 09:40:15AM -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> Sure, I can grok that. Just let me know if you want any more action from
> me.
Any thoughts here? Would you like me to prepare my patches any
differently?
Brian
Hi Bjorn,
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 12:17:02AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 05:26:09PM -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 06:28:25PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > Can we fix them all at the same time as you fix Rockchip? Maybe we
> > > should have a
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 05:26:09PM -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> Hi Bjorn,
>
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 06:28:25PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 10:22:19AM -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:25:41AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > > These don't ha
Hi Bjorn,
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 06:28:25PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 10:22:19AM -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:25:41AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > These don't have .remove:
> > >
> > > imx6_pcie_driver
> > > ls_pcie_driver
> > >
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 10:22:19AM -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> Hi Bjorn,
>
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:25:41AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 06:46:15PM -0800, Brian Norris wrote:
> > > Currently, if we try to unbind the platform device, the remove will
> > > succeed, bu
Hi Bjorn,
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:25:41AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 06:46:15PM -0800, Brian Norris wrote:
> > Currently, if we try to unbind the platform device, the remove will
> > succeed, but the removal won't undo most of the registration, leaving
> > partially-c
On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 06:46:15PM -0800, Brian Norris wrote:
> Currently, if we try to unbind the platform device, the remove will
> succeed, but the removal won't undo most of the registration, leaving
> partially-configured PCI devices in the system.
>
> This allows, for example, a simple 'lspc
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 10:26:12AM +0800, Shawn Lin wrote:
> I just thought we should fix the domain number here by adding
> "linux,pci-domain = <0>" for rk3399.dtsi, which seems more wise
> to me now. Does it make sense to you?
I think that's fine (as noted in response to your patch). That doesn'
On 2017/3/11 3:40, Brian Norris wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 12:20:54PM +0800, Shawn Lin wrote:
On 2017/3/10 11:22, Shawn Lin wrote:
On 2017/3/10 10:46, Brian Norris wrote:
Currently, if we try to unbind the platform device, the remove will
succeed, but the removal won't undo most of the reg
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 12:20:54PM +0800, Shawn Lin wrote:
> On 2017/3/10 11:22, Shawn Lin wrote:
> >On 2017/3/10 10:46, Brian Norris wrote:
> >>Currently, if we try to unbind the platform device, the remove will
> >>succeed, but the removal won't undo most of the registration, leaving
> >>partiall
On 2017/3/10 11:22, Shawn Lin wrote:
On 2017/3/10 10:46, Brian Norris wrote:
Currently, if we try to unbind the platform device, the remove will
succeed, but the removal won't undo most of the registration, leaving
partially-configured PCI devices in the system.
This allows, for example, a simp
On 2017/3/10 10:46, Brian Norris wrote:
Currently, if we try to unbind the platform device, the remove will
succeed, but the removal won't undo most of the registration, leaving
partially-configured PCI devices in the system.
This allows, for example, a simple 'lspci' to crash the system, as it
Currently, if we try to unbind the platform device, the remove will
succeed, but the removal won't undo most of the registration, leaving
partially-configured PCI devices in the system.
This allows, for example, a simple 'lspci' to crash the system, as it
will try to touch the freed (via devm_*) d
13 matches
Mail list logo
