From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756834AbZHFVlQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Aug 2009 17:41:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756805AbZHFVlP (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Aug 2009 17:41:15 -0400 Received: from outbound-mail-39.bluehost.com ([69.89.20.193]:41756 "HELO outbound-mail-39.bluehost.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1756379AbZHFVlP (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Aug 2009 17:41:15 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=virtuousgeek.org; h=Received:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:X-Mailer:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Identified-User; b=q2oWzLJya1+AikLPju1WSmylqnqYzMv8HpF0TlBnkdz2fhoNDP05EquyVYNoV+VQAVRLEUaKaE7SZxT7mB9CsRWWlk4MgX8WHr8Uppz26eD4jVnOi6RAyWenbHrqIird; Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 14:41:12 -0700 From: Jesse Barnes To: Frans Pop Cc: David John , torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yinghai@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Remove Spurious PnP Memory Reserved Warning Message-ID: <20090806144112.77752665@jbarnes-g45> In-Reply-To: <200908011256.11628.elendil@planet.nl> References: <1248505976-4952-1-BlackWidow-davidjon@xenontk.org> <1248753983-4334-1-BlackWidow-davidjon@xenontk.org> <20090728093137.52575d8c@jbarnes-g45> <200908011256.11628.elendil@planet.nl> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.2 (GTK+ 2.17.5; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Identified-User: {10642:box514.bluehost.com:virtuous:virtuousgeek.org} {sentby:smtp auth 75.111.28.251 authed with jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org} Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 1 Aug 2009 12:56:10 +0200 Frans Pop wrote: > On Tuesday 28 July 2009, Jesse Barnes wrote: > > I'm inclined to keep the message, since it's just a dev_info and > > does provide interesting info sometimes. So unless Linus wants to > > kill it... > > Jesse, what do you think of the less invasive patch I suggested in > http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/7/24/16? I like it a bit better since it preserves the info in the case where a resource was already reserved, so I'm fine if it goes upstream. We're just talking about debug info here so most users shouldn't notice either unless there's a real problem. -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center