* Dan Williams <dan.j.willi...@intel.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Christoph Hellwig <h...@infradead.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:15:32AM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> >> In fact it was originally "type-6" until ACPI 5
> >> claimed that number for official use, so these
> >> platforms, with early proof-of-concept nvdimm support,
> >> have already gone through one transition to a new
> >> number. They need to do the same once an official
> >> number for nvdimm support is published.
> >>
> >> Put another way, these early platforms are already
> >> using out-of-tree patches for nvdimm enabling. They
> >> can continue to do so, or switch to standard methods
> >> when the standard is published.
> >
> > Not supporting hardware that is widely avaiable (I have
> > some, too) is not very user friendly.
>
> Yes, as I agreed with Ingo, allowing a driver to assume
> control of an unknown memory type with a warning or a
> kernel taint seems fine.
If someone cooks up such a patch I can apply it.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
