From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH v2-UPDATE2 3/4] resource: Add device-managed insert/remove_resource() Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 14:23:48 -0800 Message-ID: References: <1457460530-17959-1-git-send-email-toshi.kani@hpe.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: Received: from mail-io0-f195.google.com ([209.85.223.195]:35689 "EHLO mail-io0-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750802AbcCHWXt (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Mar 2016 17:23:49 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Dan Williams Cc: Toshi Kani , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Andrew Morton , "linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" , Linux ACPI , Linux Kernel Mailing List On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Dan Williams wrote: > > Here's the usage patch from Toshi [1] (copied below). It is indeed a > resource injected by nfit / nvdimm bus implementation. We just happen > to support nfit and libnvdimm as modules. > > The goal of these patches is to use the ACPI NFIT data to create a > "Persistent Memory" rather than "reserved" resource. This is for > platform-firmware implementations that use E820-Type2 rather than > E820-Type7 to describe pmem. So my worry is that there is likely exactly one or two of these kinds of sites. Why couldn't they just use insert_resource() and then remove it manually? Linus