On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 02:53:13AM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 01:55:36AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > Unfortunately if this patch does cause any machine to break, these will > > be machines that worked fine up until this point, so that would be a > > regression, which is worse. Life sucks. > > If, after a while, you think the change should go into the -stable tree, > I have no objection.
I think it shouldn't - this change will almost certainly cause a regression. There is a lot of system devices besides the host bridges that shouldn't be disabled during BAR probe, like interrupt controllers, power management controllers and so on. We need a more sophisticated fix - I'm thinking of introducing "probe" field in struct pci_dev which can be set by "early" quirk routines. Ivan. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/