public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de>
To: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>, Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>,
	linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] remove the broken PCI_MULTITHREAD_PROBE option
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2007 17:43:03 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070407004303.GF23230@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070328103625.23910f1e@gondolin.boeblingen.de.ibm.com>

On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 10:36:25AM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 15:50:06 -0700,
> Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:
> 
> > > Greg, what about driver-core-per-subsystem-multithreaded-probing.patch?
> > > PCI_MULTITHREAD_PROBE shoudn't be broken with that, only in mainline?
> > 
> > Do you want to enable PCI multithreaded probing using your patch?  I
> > don't think the world is ready for pci multithreaded probing as was
> > determined by the zillion of bug reports from people who like to enable
> > config options that state in big letters, "THIS WILL BREAK YOUR BOX"...
> 
> But IIRC, that was without my patch?

Oh yes, your patch had nothing to do with it.

It was a more general, "do we want to allow multithreaded probing at
all" type question.  Some suggested that we allow it only by letting the
individual busses handle it (like we prototyped in the USB core),
instead of having the driver core do it.

> Wouldn't per-subsystem multithreaded probing just expose bugs that
> could also be exposed on SMP systems?

Yes, it would be the same.

> > And I'm still questioning if we should add your patch at all, as I don't
> > think any other subsystems need it.  Do you?
> 
> The css/ccw busses may profit from it, since we tend to have thousands
> of devices there. OTOH, we've already tried to make probing as
> asynchronous as possible, so maybe there isn't that much gain. I'd need
> to do some measurements (when I find some time...)

Ok, I'll keep the patch then and send it to Linus for 2.6.22, I didn't
realize your stuff would work well with it.

thanks,

greg k-h

      reply	other threads:[~2007-04-07  4:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-03-27  1:02 [2.6 patch] remove the broken PCI_MULTITHREAD_PROBE option Adrian Bunk
2007-03-27 11:03 ` Cornelia Huck
2007-03-27 22:50   ` Greg KH
2007-03-28  8:36     ` Cornelia Huck
2007-04-07  0:43       ` Greg KH [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20070407004303.GF23230@suse.de \
    --to=gregkh@suse.de \
    --cc=bunk@stusta.de \
    --cc=cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=greg@kroah.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox