![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On 11-12-07 17:30, Andi Kleen wrote: > Anyways it looks like the discussion here is going in a > a loop. I had hoped David would post his test results with > another port so that we know for sure that the bus aborts > (and not port 80) is the problem on his box. But it looks like > he doesn't want to do this. Still removing the bus aborts > is probably the correct way to go forward. Yes, I do also still want to know that. David (Reed)? > Only needs a patch now. If nobody beats me to it i'll > add one later to my tree. Pavel Machek already posted one. His udelay(8) wants to be less -- 1 or "to be safe" perhaps 2. http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/12/9/131 Rene. | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2007-12-11 17:55 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||