![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
I'm honestly not sure how to try what you suggested to try, since I'm nothing even remotely close to a kernel geek and it was over my head. However, I'd gladly test anything that you think would be worth testing, if you would please put it in way that I could understand, such as "change line 'foo' in probe.c into 'foolio'" Thanks again for all of your help, Marcos On 4/23/07, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com> wrote: > Given that all of the reports are in cases when the adjustment is *not* > being done (and only a message is being printed), I can only assume that > the breakage results from the adding of PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_SPACE_IO > into the resource flags. I considered this unconditional setting of the flags > odd already in the original code, and added this extra flag only for > consistency reasons (because the settings reported by X indicated that > this was missing). Perhaps the adjustment (original and the added > extra flag) shouldn't be done if IORESOURCE_IO wasn't already set. > Perhaps one of those seeing the issue could try out returning from the > function right after that printk(), without any adjustment to the flags. > > Jan > > - 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/ | ||||||||||
| Last update: 2007-04-24 01:01 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||