Re: [PATCH] pcie_portdriver: FIX: pcie_port_device_remove

[Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>]

On Thursday 19 February 2009 15:30:39 Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl> writes:
> > On Thursday 19 February 2009, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> writes:
> >> > There are large-scale and conflicting changes to this file in
> >> > linux-next.
> >> >
> >> > If we want to jam this fix into 2.6.29 (and it looks like something we
> >> > want) then this will trash the linux-next changes.  It will cause me
> >> > grief, and will cause Stephen grief unless the pci tree is suitably
> >> > changed, which will cause Jesse grief. Either way: grief.
> >>
> >> Ugh.
> >>
> >> I had better have a good hard look at linux-next.  I tried to ask
> >> earlier
> >
> > about
> >
> >> ongoing working but I didn't hear anything.
> >
> > Yes, you did: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123342565225134&w=4
>
> My apologies.  I should have said I did not recognize anything that
> was likely to conflict from what I hear from what I heard.  I did
> hear that the pcie port driver was touched to properly handle msi-x and I
> foolishly thought that was already merged upstream.  Especially after
> I glanced at Jesse's tree and I did not see any recent pci patches.
> Which led me to foolishly assume everything had already been merged
> into Linus's tree.
>
> Andrew with respect to 2.6.29 my patch while correct and useful has
> no immediate utility, as the pciehp driver will crash and burn horribly
> if you attempt to hotplug it.  So I should find the other pci port driver
> changes and rebase on top of them.  Assuming that patch is scheduled to
> merge for 2.6.30.

Yeah, if it's in my -next tree, it's scheduled for .30.  I have one other 
hotplug related set from Kenji-san for .29 as well (to fix a regression James 
reported).  Search for "fix wrong assumption" to check that one out.

-- 
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center