From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jesse Barnes Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] ACPI PCI slot detection driver Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 12:02:09 -0800 Message-ID: <200803041202.09702.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> References: <20080229002341.GA21420@ldl.fc.hp.com> <200803041018.29035.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> <20080304193036.GB5534@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20080304193036.GB5534@suse.de> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Greg KH Cc: Matthew Wilcox , Alex Chiang , Gary Hade , kaneshige.kenji@jp.fujitsu.com, warthog19@eaglescrag.net, kristen.c.accardi@intel.com, rick.jones2@hp.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday, March 04, 2008 11:30 am Greg KH wrote: > bad data is worse. But we don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater; assuming there are lots of machines out there with good data (I really hope that's the case), this feature seems like a really good idea. > And then there's the machines with duplicate slot names, how does this > code handle PCI slots with that? I think some of the IBM machines had > non-hotplug slots named the same as the hotplug slots, right? > > This stuff needs a _lot_ of testing on a lot of different machines, and > a sane way to fall-back if there are errors to ensure that working > machines don't break. Yeah, I think a good fallback is important. Might be good to have a blacklist along with a heuristic for detecting duplicate slot names... Anyway, yeah, testing will be huge here. Jesse