Re: [PATCH] x86: provide a DMI based port 0x80 I/O delay override.

[Rene Herman]

On 17-12-07 22:56, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> * Rene Herman <rene.herman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Rene Herman <rene.herman@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > hm, i see this as a step backwards from the pretty flexible patch 
> > > that David already tested. (and which also passed a few hundred 
> > > bootup tests on my x86 test-grid)
> > Please see Alan's comment that udelay (and none) shouldn't yet be 
> > provided as a choice. It opens race windows in drivers even when it 
> > works in practice on most setups. The version with "udelay" and "none" 
> > is not minimal, not low risk and certainly not .24 material.
>
> huh? By default we still use port 0x80. Any udelay is non-default and 
> needs the user to explicitly switch to it.  But it enables us to debug
> any suspected drivers by asking testers to: "please try this driver with 
> io_delay=udelay, does it still work fine?". So those extra options are 
> quite sensible. If you have any real technical arguments against that 
> then please let us know.

Ingo, have lots of fun playing with yourself, but remove my sign off from 
anything with the udelay and none methods.

Rene.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/