On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 11:45:24AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
quoted text
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 11:40:02AM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > Personally I absolutely don't agree with that.
> > Ivan's patch is another attempt to make MMCONFIG work somewhat better,
> > but does not provide the explicit opt-in that I think is required at
> > this point; people have tried to get MMCONFIG stable for a really long time,
> > and failed still upto today. At least my patience is up and this needs
> > to be opt-in.

So your argument is that MMCONFIG sucks, therefore Linux has to have a
horrible interface to extended PCI config space?

quoted text
> I think I agree with Arjan here, Ivan's patch should also work on top of
> this one, and will help out some machines.
> 
> But as he hasn't asked for it to be included in the kernel tree, that's
> a moot point right now :)

He didn't?  I certainly ask for it to be included.

-- 
Intel are signing my paycheques ... these opinions are still mine
"Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this
operating system, but compare it to ours.  We can't possibly take such
a retrograde step."
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/