On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 08:18:04PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
quoted text
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 07:05:05PM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > I think there's only one fundamental disagreement; and that is:
> > do we think that things are now totally fixed and no new major issues
> > will arrive after the "fix yet another mmconfig thing" patches are merged.
> > 
> > If the answer is no, then imho my patch is the right approach; it will limit the damage and doesn't make
> > the people suffer who don't need extended config space.
> > If the answer is yet, then my patch is not needed.
> > 
> > This is a judgment call; I'm skeptical, others are more optimistic that after 2 years of messing around
> > they have finally found the last golden fix.
> 
> I'm more optimistic because we've so severely restricted the use of
> mmconf after these patches that it's unlikely to cause problems.  I also
> hear Vista is now using mmconf, so fewer implementations are going to
> be buggy at this point.

Hahahaha, oh, that's a good one...

But what about the thousands of implementations out there that are
buggy?

I'm with Arjan here, I'm very skeptical.

Matthew, with Arjan's patch, is anything that currently works now
broken?  Why do you feel it is somehow "wrong"?

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/