[lkml]   [2012]   [Jun]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Linux
Hi Jiri,

On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 11:33:28PM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 06/22/2012 11:18 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> >> Given nobody noticed till now, I would incline to drop that patch from
> >> 2.6.32 series. Opinions?
> >
> > Which one would you drop then ? You got me lost now. I mean, since you've
> > been the only one to notice an issue, I have no problem with following you
> > on the best way to fix it but I need to understand what you want then :-)
> Ok, now I spent some time to look into that.

thank you.

> I thought suse does not need the original patch (PNP: work around Dell
> 1536/1546 BIOS MMCONFIG bug that breaks USB) as we do not support
> CONFIG_AMD_NB. But in, it is named CONFIG_K8_NB. So actually
> we need it.
> There are two problems with the backport:
> * missing amd_get_mmconfig_range (added by 24d25dbfa6)

Indeed I can see it now. Thanks for the pointer to the patch.

> * used wrong names: CONFIG_AMD_NB and asm/amd_nb.h
> The latter can be fixed in two ways:
> * easier: change CONFIG_AMD_NB to CONFIG_K8_NB and asm/amd_nb.h to
> asm/k8.h (obviously, there will be no "upstream commit" for that)

OK I can see it in quirks.c. Indeed, it looks like this is the way to
go. I'm not opposed to merging it even without upstream commit since
it's a fix for a regression we introduced during a backport. So that's

> * maybe harder: backport 23ac4ae827 including dependencies (I haven't
> looked if there are any)

I'd rather avoid backporting such changes into stable when the fix is

Thanks for these precisions, it's clear to me now. I'm queuing it.


 \ /
  Last update: 2012-06-23 23:41    [W:0.046 / U:0.564 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site