From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH][BNX2]: Disable MSI on 5706 if AMD 8132 bridge is present Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 15:49:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20060929.154917.125894679.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1159564053.3741.19.camel@rh4> <451D9007.6010905@garzik.org> <1159565963.3741.23.camel@rh4> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: jeff@garzik.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from dsl027-180-168.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([216.27.180.168]:4019 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932150AbWI2WtP (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Sep 2006 18:49:15 -0400 To: mchan@broadcom.com In-Reply-To: <1159565963.3741.23.camel@rh4> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org From: "Michael Chan" Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 14:39:23 -0700 > On Fri, 2006-09-29 at 17:28 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > Michael Chan wrote: > > > AMD believes this incompatibility is unique to the 5706, and > > > prefers to locally disable MSI rather than globally disabling it > > > using pci_msi_quirk. > > > > Why is it unique to the 5706? Is this just a guess on AMD and > > Broadcom's part? > > > I just took AMD's word for it. It doesn't matter to me whether we > disable it locally or globally. Since this is AMD's bridge, I just > follow their recommendation. They probably haven't seen this issue on > any other devices except ours. I really think this is a reasonable thing to do. It's absolutely rediculious to disable MSI for every card just because one decided to use a masked 64-bit transaction for what's supposed to be a 32-bit one. Jeff, I totally understand your knee-jerk reaction to per-device MSI validation checks, but in this case I find that knee-jerk reaction to be totally unreasonable. :-)