Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:30:58 +0100
Martin Mares <[email protected]> wrote:
Hello!
Just make it so. The name is fine, the concept is unavoidable. The
people who complain are whiners that haven't ever had to deal with
the fact that there are broken machines around.
I complain as well as the maintainer of the pciutils. Breaking all
userspace accesses to extended configuration space just because there
is a couple of chipsets
it's not "just a couple of chipsets", it's actually
* a whole lot of bioses
* at least one whole CPU generation
* ..
* ..
Do you really want to code all of that into your userspace access code as well?
That's silly. He clearly should not have to... just like he should
not have to add code to figure out if a device is MMCONFIG-active or not.
MMCONFIG should be all or none. System vendors sure as hell will not be
testing this crazy mixed-access model. System vendors DO test the
"always off" model, obviously, and the "always on" model is entering
their testing regime as Vista certification looms and as Linux starts to
find bugs.
Just Say No to entering "hw vendor never ever tests it this way" land.
Jeff
--
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]