From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751505Ab1ELShk (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 May 2011 14:37:40 -0400 Received: from oproxy7-pub.bluehost.com ([67.222.55.9]:55721 "HELO oproxy7-pub.bluehost.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1750738Ab1ELShi convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 May 2011 14:37:38 -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=RcvS5CBJ/VwIbGfvxDjZYNLbIziPQAS+XDuGFVFVpsxpkPP80udTuT2tDg9kGo8QmEYPVNvwARuUMRI62FeFciFpVdj/rjC7gxWXNtIiYeWiCxv/wv6PKS/VjHT607eA; Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 11:37:26 -0700 From: Jesse Barnes To: Ram Pai Cc: Linus Torvalds , Yinghai Lu , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" , Andrew Morton , Bjorn Helgaas Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2] pci: Check bridge resources after resource allocation. Message-ID: <20110512113726.123fd85b@jbarnes-desktop> In-Reply-To: <20110512182229.GQ8195@ram-laptop> References: <20110506081243.GF16782@ram-laptop> <4DC4586C.6020308@kernel.org> <20110507015240.GN16782@ram-laptop> <4DC4B059.3030502@kernel.org> <4DC64C58.70203@kernel.org> <20110509142014.617e3100@jbarnes-desktop> <4DC9E415.5010402@kernel.org> <20110512180638.GA5012@ram-laptop> <20110512182229.GQ8195@ram-laptop> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.22.0; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Identified-User: {10642:box514.bluehost.com:virtuous:virtuousgeek.org} {sentby:smtp auth 67.161.37.189 authed with jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org} Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 12 May 2011 11:22:29 -0700 Ram Pai wrote: > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 11:14:07AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Ram Pai wrote: > > > > > > I like this approach than the earlier approach because it > > > closes the subtle bug _introduced_ by my earlier patch, > > >        commit c8adf9a3e873eddaaec11ac410a99ef6b9656938 > > > > > > However i think the implementation can be made cleaner. Comments below.. > > > > Ack on all of that. Do we have confirmation that the patch works, though? > > In theory it should work. But I have not tested it yet. I will work with Yinghai and > have a cleaned-up/working/tested patch your way soon. Linus, I don't have anything else queued up, so you may as well take this one directly if you want it in 2.6.39. It's a regression fix, but resource changes always make me nervous. Alternately, I could put it into 2.6.40 instead, the backport to 2.6.39.x if it survives until 2.6.40-rc2 or so... Thanks, -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center