Greetings.

There is a code flaw in the bfsort whitelist, where there are redundant
entries for the same two HP systems, DL385 G2 and DL585 G2. This patch
replaces those redundant entries with the correct ones. The correct
entries are for large-volume systems, the DL360 and DL380.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

commit ec69f0374c3b0ad7ea991b0e9ac00377acfe5b1a
Author: Tony Camuso <tony.camuso@hp.com>
Date:   Wed May 14 07:09:28 2008 -0400

     Replace Redundant Whitelist Entries with the Correct Ones

     The ProLiant DL585 G2 and the DL585 G2 are entered reundantly
     in the dmi_system_id table. What should have been there are the
     DL360 and DL380. This patch simply replaces the redundant
     entries with the correct entries.

          arch/x86/pci/common.c |    8 ++++----
          1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

     Signed-off-by: Tony Camuso <tony.camuso@hp.com>
     Signed-off-by: Pat Schoeller <patrick.schoeller@hp.com>

diff --git a/arch/x86/pci/common.c b/arch/x86/pci/common.c
index 8545c8a..ee76b02 100644
--- a/arch/x86/pci/common.c
+++ b/arch/x86/pci/common.c
@@ -328,18 +328,18 @@ static struct dmi_system_id __devinitdata pciprobe_dmi_table[] = {
  #endif
  	{
  		.callback = set_bf_sort,
-		.ident = "HP ProLiant DL385 G2",
+		.ident = "HP ProLiant DL360",
  		.matches = {
  			DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "HP"),
-			DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "ProLiant DL385 G2"),
+			DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "ProLiant DL360"),
  		},
  	},
  	{
  		.callback = set_bf_sort,
-		.ident = "HP ProLiant DL585 G2",
+		.ident = "HP ProLiant DL380",
  		.matches = {
  			DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "HP"),
-			DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "ProLiant DL585 G2"),
+			DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "ProLiant DL380"),
  		},
  	},
  	{}
--

[ message continues ]

On Thu, 15 May 2008 14:40:14 -0400

This is going to make everyone with those boxes who upgrades suddenely
get their devices re-ordered and renamed when the probe order changes.
That seems extremely inappropriate.

Alan
--

[ message continues ]

HP maintains that more of our customers, especially new customers,
will be adversely affected by NOT implementing this patch for the
following reasons.

1. HP issued a Customer Advisory for existing customers to use "pci=bfsort"
    in the boot command for these systems. Customers using pci=bfsort in
    their boot scripts will be unaffected by this patch.

2. Customers using only the two embedded NI devices will be unaffected.

3. Because of the use of labels for disk devices, they are unaffected.

4. New customers who must add pci=bfsort to their boot scripts have
    expressed dissatisfaction.

The only time this patch would induce any confusion for an existing customer
is upon the convergence of the following situations.

1. The user has not followed the instructions in the release notes
    for the DL360 and DL380,

    AND

2. The user has added NI cards to the option slots,

    AND

3. The user upgrades his kernel.



--

[ message continues ]

Ok, I'll put it in linux-next for now then.  It would be good to hear some 
feedback from users about it though...

Thanks,
Jesse
--

[ message continues ]

Thanks, Jesse.

Much appreciated.
--

[ message continues ]

Jesse,

I would like to add that HP has tested the patch, and our risk
assessment shows more benefit for HP ProLiant customers than the
possible adverse affects.

Since this patch only affects the two HP ProLiant platforms listed, and
since HP is willing to take ownership for any problems related to the
patch, we would like to see it ACK'd and added to the current 2.6.26
kernel.

Regards,
Tony
--

[ message continues ]

I just sent Linus the pull request for this fix; should be upstream soon.

Thanks,
Jesse
--

[ message continues ]