From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [v2,PCI] move ICHx GbE NVM write-protection from e1000e to PCI quirk Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 11:49:52 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <20081117.114952.81357471.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20081116.191252.80669091.davem@davemloft.net> <4921C8B0.9060301@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, bruce.w.allan@intel.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: csnook@redhat.com Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:46621 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752446AbYKQTtw (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Nov 2008 14:49:52 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4921C8B0.9060301@redhat.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Chris Snook Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 14:40:32 -0500 > David Miller wrote: > > I'm less than thrilled with this patch so I'm not going to apply it. > > I mean, what are we going to do, for every single device that has a > > NVRAM we're going to add some PCI quirk and some new global foo_* > > kernel command line option to turn it off? > > That doesn't make any sense at all, sorry. > > Could we protect it in a PCI quirk, and optionally unprotect it in the driver? I think it's an overreaction, frankly. Doing it purely in the driver should be fine. Again are we going to add a NVRAM protect quirk for every PCI device on the planet that has a NVRAM? It's not appropriate at all.