From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751315AbWFTW2E (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jun 2006 18:28:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751317AbWFTW2E (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jun 2006 18:28:04 -0400 Received: from h-66-166-126-70.lsanca54.covad.net ([66.166.126.70]:22507 "EHLO myri.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751315AbWFTW2C (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jun 2006 18:28:02 -0400 Message-ID: <44987661.5050907@myri.com> Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 18:27:45 -0400 From: Brice Goglin User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060516) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg KH CC: Andi Kleen , Dave Olson , discuss@x86-64.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Greg Lindahl Subject: Re: [discuss] Re: [RFC] Whitelist chipsets supporting MSI and check Hyper-transport capabilities References: <200606200925.30926.ak@suse.de> <20060620212908.GA17012@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20060620212908.GA17012@suse.de> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Greg KH wrote: > No, I don't want a whitelist, as it will be hard to always keep adding > stuff to it (unless we can somehow figure out how to put a "cut-off" > date check in there). My second patchset (Improve MSI detection v2) uses "PCI-E vs non-PCI-E" as a cut-off "date". After reading all what people said in this thread, I still think it is a good compromise (and very simple to implement) if we blacklist PCI-E and whitelist non-PCI-E chipsets. Brice