On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 11:29:23PM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > Steve Langasek wrote: > > Well, there's no reason that someone can't use iommu=soft when booting the > > installer, as well. So perhaps it would be best to clone that bug and > > include this information in the installation guide or errata?
> Yes that's a good idea. > I assume it would be also a problem, too just set the installer to > iomm=soft (e.g. via the bootloader)? Yes, it is a problem; there is no window of opportunity for making such a change before release (there was even less of one than for the kernel), and the fix properly belongs in the kernel package, not in the installer or bootloaders. > One last thing perhaps. I'd include a link to the kernel.org bug report > in your release notes text and maybe some information that systems might > already have some data corruption (as this bug is not new). Link to kernel.org is included; "systems might already have some data corruption" is not relevant to the release notes that I can see, the release notes are about upgrades from sarge which did not have this problem (because it didn't support hw iommu at all). > btw: Is the kernel team now aware of your patch and will it use it in > following linux-* packages? i.e. in unstable? The kernel team is aware of it, but no decision has been made yet to include it in the kernel packages, since the verdict is still out upstream. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
