[lkml]   [2011]   [Oct]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [01/38] PCI: Set PCI-E Max Payload Size on fabric
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 1:24 PM, Greg KH <> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 12:14:05PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:

>> It's not obvious that this fits the criteria for -stable
>> (Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt).
>> For example, I can't tell what real problem this fixes.
> Yeah, it's not obvious, but I have had a lot of reports that 3.0 does
> not work on some systems without this set of patches.  Now figuring out
> of those same systems ever worked at all is getting to be quite
> difficult as I don't have access to the hardware, and the people that do
> aren't responding to test requests.  But from what I gather, 2.6.32 did
> work on these boxes, so it is a regression somehow, but I am not
> positive of this.

I'd like to know more about this regression.

> Now I'm very open to pushback, and if people really don't want these in
> (i.e. the PCI maintainer(s) say no), then I'll drop them and work with
> the distros to get them into their trees so that their customers's
> systems will work properly.

If distros want these patches, does that mean they have bug reports?
URLs to them would be helpful.

I just haven't seen any concrete information that says -stable will be
better off if it includes these patches. We've tripped over enough
problems upstream that I'm concerned they might make things worse
rather than better.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2011-10-11 21:51    [W:0.066 / U:1.280 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site