On Sun 2007-12-30 21:46:50, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > So the current plan is to go with an io_delay=udelay default in v2.6.25, > > > to give this a migration window, and io_delay=none in v2.6.26 [and a > > > complete removal of arch/x86/kernel/io_delay.c], once the _p() uses are > > > fixed up. This is gradual enough to notice any regressions we care about > > > and also makes it nicely bisectable and gradual. > > > > You will break systems if you blindly go around disabling _p delays > > for ISA and LPC bus devices. The DEC Hinote laptops for example are > > well known for requiring the correct ISA and other keyboard controller > > delays. I don't expect anyone to test with a hinote or see it until it > > hits Debian or similar 'low resource' friendly devices. > > well, using io_delay=udelay is not 'blindly disabling'. io_delay=none > would be the end goal, once all _p() API uses are eliminated by > transformation. In drivers/ alone that's more than 1000 callsites, so > it's quite frequently used, and wont go away overnight.
IOW elimination of broken inb_p()/outb_p() interfaces is the ultimate goal. Agreed. -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- 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/
