On Fri, 13 Oct 2006, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 01:57:48PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > Would it be okay for pci_block_user_cfg_access() to use its own cache, so
> > it doesn't interfere with data previously cached by pci_save_state()?
>
> My suggestion is just to require that the callers have previously called
> pci_save_state(). The PCI PM stack already has, and it's a one-line
> change to the IPR driver.
Okay. Would you like to write a patch with that fix? Be sure to add a
comment explaining the need for a previous call to pci_save_state().
At least it will get things going for now, even if it isn't perfectly
correct in the long run.
Alan Stern
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
