Re: Happy New Year (and v2.6.20-rc3 released)

[Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>]

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Jeff, 
>  what was the resolution to this one? Just revert the offending commit, or 
> what?
> 
> We're about five weeks into the 2.6.20-rc series. I was hoping for a 
> two-month release rather than the usual dragged-out three months, so I'd 
> like to get these regressions to be actively fixed. By forcible reverts if 
> that is what it takes.

Data points:

* I was unable to argue against Alan's logic behind 
368c73d4f689dae0807d0a2aa74c61fd2b9b075f but I just don't like it. 
Regardless of whether or not this truly reflects how the PCI device is 
wired, it makes pci_request_regions() and similar resource handling code 
behave differently.

* Alan's 368c73d4f689dae0807d0a2aa74c61fd2b9b075f change was IMO 
incomplete, because he obviously did not fix all the breakage it caused

* Alan proposed a libata fix patch.  I noted two key breakages in his 
fix patch, one of which Alan agreed was a problem.

* Outside of the two bugfix pushes, I've been actively avoiding 
computers during the holidays.  It's a shocking concept I'm trying with 
the new wife :)  Don't expect anything useful from me until Jan 4th or so.

* This affects a lot of Intel ICH platforms in legacy/combined mode, so 
it's definitely high on my post-holiday priority list.  If the patch is 
not reverted, then I'll definitely fix it sooner rather than later.

* For 2.6.21, I proposed to yank out all the ugly combined mode hacks 
(grep for '____request_resource'), which should make Alan's change a bit 
easier... but nonetheless stirs the IDE quirks code again.

* I am lazy and would rather not touch the fragile ata_pci_init_one() 
code now /and/ in 2.6.21.


So I vote for revert, for 2.6.20, but I know Alan will squawk loudly. 
Also NOTE thoughfb0f2b40faff41f03acaa2ee6e6231fc96ca497c which fixes 
fallout from Alan's change, too.

	Jeff