From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933104AbXCXXo1 (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Mar 2007 19:44:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933140AbXCXXo1 (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Mar 2007 19:44:27 -0400 Received: from cantor.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:44600 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933104AbXCXXo0 (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Mar 2007 19:44:26 -0400 Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2007 16:41:54 -0700 From: Greg KH To: "Kok, Auke" Cc: "Williams, Mitch A" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, "Ronciak, John" , "Brandeburg, Jesse" Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.20.3] Flush writes to MSI-X table Message-ID: <20070324234154.GA10057@suse.de> References: <20070323222207.GB22500@suse.de> <08FE5CC30C9A3F41BF819A502CF7BF6EF55DD2@fmsmsx411.amr.corp.intel.com> <20070324002802.GA18061@suse.de> <20070324003030.GA18615@suse.de> <4605B555.3020107@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4605B555.3020107@intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Mar 24, 2007 at 04:33:41PM -0700, Kok, Auke wrote: > Greg KH wrote: > >On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 05:28:02PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > >>On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 05:24:23PM -0700, Williams, Mitch A wrote: > >>>Greg KH wrote: > >>>>Well, I'm sure you can agree that it is _very_ late in the 2.6.21 > >>>>release cycle to expect to get this in for that kernel. How about > >>>>waiting for 2.6.22 and if it's a big deal, getting it into the > >>>>2.6.21-stable tree if needed. > >>>> > >>>>So far I have not seen any bug reports that this patch would fix, have > >>>>you? > >>>Well, I've seen several bug reports on this issue -- but they're all > >>>internal to Intel. > >>> > >>>However, we do have here a real bug, which shows up on real hardware, > >>>which will be released soon. Obviously, I can't discuss release > >>>schedules, but "soon" is a good word to use. You might find out more if > >>>you read The Register (wink, wink). > >>Ok, but again, as this is something that no one outside of a company can > >>see, it doesn't really make sense to rush it into the kernel. > >> > >>>Given the time frame for release of 2.6.21, I'd be fine with skipping > >>>2.6.20.x, and putting this in 2.6.21. But we really don't want to wait > >>>for 2.6.22. > >>I think it needs to wait, especially given that there is no public > >>hardware yet. > >> > >>I'll add this to my queue. > > > >No, nevermind, I'll wait till it hits linux-pci and gets review from the > >people there, as there are a _ton_ of other pending MSI patches that you > >will need to be aware of, as they might conflict with this patch. > >Please see the linux-pci archives for details of them. > > Actually Mitch and me have been monitoring those and applying them as they > came in for the last two months as some of those partially impacted > (improved) the issue. The read flush to update the msi-x tables is the only > thing missing right now. Are you including the 21 set MSI patch that want to linux-pci two days ago? I don't understand your need to try to rush an api change like this in so quickly in an area that has a lot of churn and disagreement lately. _Especially_ so late in the release cycle, and with no hardware publicly availble. What is the pressing need here? thanks, greg k-h