On Sat, 11 Dec 2010 19:34:05 -0800
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

quoted text
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 5:37 PM, Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks, I'll add Dan and Rafael's tested-bys to the patches (they're
> > already in my for-linus tree).  Unless Linus has a problem with them
> > I'll send them over to him this weekend or Monday.
> 
> See my other email I just sent out.
> 
> I really am not going to take some totally new experimental and hacky
> major PCI resource management thing this late in the -rc game. No way,
> no how.
> 
> If the top-down allocator is causing regressions that cannot be fixed
> by _simple_ patches, we're simply going to have to undo it. What's the
> advantage of top-down? None. Not if we then need all this crap, which
> we could as easily do on top of the bottom-up one WITHOUT any
> regressions.
> 
> Why isn't anybody else questioning the whole basic premise here?

Questioning the whole premise is fine, but so far we've gone in (or at
least think we're going in) a consistent direction: behave like Windows
on platforms designed for Windows to avoid bugs that Windows doesn't
hit and enable all the same devices Windows allows.

But yes, I really don't like the nx6325 patch either; there's obviously
something we're still missing that's preventing us from doing the right
thing on that platform.  Quirking it isn't a good long term answer.

-- 
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
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/