From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH] PNP: don't check for conflicts with bridge windows Date: Mon, 3 May 2010 16:03:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <20100503164647.308.86063.stgit@bob.kio> <20100503164721.308.11075.stgit@bob.kio> <1272927008.28149.91.camel@dc7800.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:41265 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759705Ab0ECXEs (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 May 2010 19:04:48 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1272927008.28149.91.camel@dc7800.home> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Bjorn Helgaas Cc: Len Brown , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Pavel Kysilka , Adam Belay , Jaroslav Kysela On Mon, 3 May 2010, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > My *plan* was to make pci_root.c a PNP driver, so it would use the > pre-parsed PNP resources to find the host bridge windows rather than > re-parsing the ACPI _CRS info by hand. Those PNP resources are not in > the resource tree when the driver first sees them (which might be a > deficiency of our current PNP core), so I don't think there's currently > a way for the driver to distinguish IO from MEM unless it's in the > resource itself. > > At this stage of the release, my preference would be to use the patch > above (with the intention of coming back later for some more work), or > to just revert fa35b4926 (PNPACPI window support) and maybe 9d7cca04 > (generic window support). If we revert those patches, I'll have to > figure out another way to clean up pci_root.c. Oh, I'm fine with your patch, I just reacted to it wondering whether maybe there was some cleaner way of solving the problem. I guess annotating the resource itself is ok. So don't take my comment as a NAK, more of a "hmm, how about.. " Linus