Re: Regression with commit f9cde5f in 2.6.30-gitX

Thomas Gleixner
2009-06-24T18:47:18Z

On Wed, 24 Jun 2009, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > I was thinking 32 but 64 would be better if there aren't any
> > downsides elsewhere of making the array that big.
>
> Just chatting with Len about this; apparently the PNPACPI layer ran
> into something similar awhile back, and they had to go to a variable
> sized list of resources, due to weird machines with huge numbers of
> resources. Matthew says he's got an idea about how to fix this up; if
> that doesn't work out I'll see about making the bus resource array into
> a list instead.

Can we just bring the limit check back and increase the number for now
until folks come up with a better solution ?

Thanks,

tglx