On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 05:13:54 -0400 Yong Wang <yong.y.wang@linux.intel.com> wrote:

quoted text
> RMRRs do not necessarily have to be present on all VT-d capable platforms.
> The printk is just informational and does not need to be followed by an
> error return.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yong Y Wang <yong.y.wang@intel.com>
> ---
>  dmar.c |    4 +---
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/dmar.c b/drivers/pci/dmar.c
> index f941f60..8bf86ae 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/dmar.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/dmar.c
> @@ -317,10 +317,8 @@ int __init dmar_table_init(void)
>  		return -ENODEV;
>  	}
>  
> -	if (list_empty(&dmar_rmrr_units)) {
> +	if (list_empty(&dmar_rmrr_units))
>  		printk(KERN_INFO PREFIX "No RMRR found\n");
> -		return -ENODEV;
> -	}
>  
>  	return 0;
>  }

From your description I am unable to work out how important this fix is.

Is it needed in 2.6.25.x?  In 2.6.26?  In 2.6.27?  There's no way for me to
know :(
--
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/