From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from erley.org ([97.107.129.9]:34704 "EHLO remote.erley.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754415Ab2JTAhp (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Oct 2012 20:37:45 -0400 Received: from [IPv6:2001:4978:142:0:223:15ff:fed1:55bc] (unknown [IPv6:2001:4978:142:0:223:15ff:fed1:55bc]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by remote.erley.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4A5D92862E for ; Sat, 20 Oct 2012 00:31:15 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <5081F0D2.50509@erley.org> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 20:31:14 -0400 From: Pat Erley MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org Subject: Ricoh Multifunction Device DMAR Bug Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: I've been hitting the bug talked about in this thread: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=605888 and using the patch in Comment 7 as a work around. In reading on, I saw that redhat released a kernel (kernel-2.6.35.6-45.fc14) that contains a patch like this: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/scm-commits/2010-October/510785.html Is there any reason to omit this from mainline? The patch that redhat is using seems like a 'better' fix than the fixup I'm using from Comment 7, but does that completely disable DMAR when this device is present? That seems like an overkill approach, when there is the hack from the thread from redhat's bugzilla. Is there some other impact from the patch I'm using? Everything works fine on my system with it. Anyways, the point to all of this was, I really don't like having to carry patches and apply them with each update. I'd love to see some fixup get into mainline, especially if it can be minimal impact on functionality, like the first thread linked here. Is there anything else I can provide to help facilitate this? Pat Erley