Re: [PATCH 5/5] PNP: HP nx6325 fixup: reserve unreported resources

[Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@hp.com>]

On Tuesday, December 14, 2010 01:44:51 pm Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > That's a maintainable approach. But it's maintainable ONLY if we then
> > don't do other random changes that invalidates all the years of
> > testing we've had.
> 
> Btw, looking at all the x86-specific commits that have gone in, I'm
> *extremely* unhappy that they apparently stopped honoring that
> "resource_alloc_from_bottom" flag that I explicitly asked for.

In 20-20 hindsight, I should have made that switch affect more things.
I tried to do what you asked; I obviously just didn't do enough, and
I am sorry.

> So it looks like it's not enough to just set that flag. We have to
> actually revert all the commits in this area as broken.
> 
> Which is sad, but since they clearly *are* broken and don't honor the
> flag that was there explicitly to avoid this problem and make it easy
> to test reverting it, I'm really pissed off. The WHOLE POINT of that
> flag was to give people an option to say "use the old resource
> allocation order because the new one doesn't work for me".
> 
> So at this point the only question is whether I should just revert the
> whole effing lot, or whether there are patches to fix the code to
> honor the "allocate from bottom" bit and then just set it by default
> again.
> 
> Bjorn? Preferences?

Let me identify the set of reversion candidates and the consequences,
and then we can figure out whether it's better to retreat or push
forward.

Bjorn