From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Wilcox Subject: ppc64-sym2-fix.patch Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 18:13:47 +0100 Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20031015171347.GE16535@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:23739 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263697AbTJORNs (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Oct 2003 13:13:48 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Anton Blanchard Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Hi Anton. Looks like you forgot to cc me on this one: ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.0-test7/2.6.0-test7-mm1/broken-out/ppc64-sym2-fix.patch On first look, you're right. We should do something more sensible if pci_set_mwi() fails (eg, just report it to the user and carry on without setting MWI). But the comment indicates that some revisions of the 896 *require* MWI to work around chip errata. So I don't particularly want to do that. The comment in include/asm-ppc64/pci.h seems to indicate that it actually wouldn't do any harm to return success since the "hardware treats MWI the same as memory write". What do you think? -- "It's not Hollywood. War is real, war is primarily not about defeat or victory, it is about death. I've seen thousands and thousands of dead bodies. Do you think I want to have an academic debate on this subject?" -- Robert Fisk