[PATCH] powerpc/eeh: Update MAINTAINERS
Linas Vepstas
linasvepstas at gmail.com
Sat Jun 29 03:47:14 EST 2013
Hi,
On 27 June 2013 21:11, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh at kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-06-28 at 09:59 +0800, Gavin Shan wrote:
>> Update MAINTAINERS to reflect recent changes.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan <shangw at linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> ---
>> MAINTAINERS | 4 ++++
>> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
>> index 5be702c..b447392 100644
>> --- a/MAINTAINERS
>> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
>> @@ -6146,10 +6146,14 @@ F: drivers/firmware/pcdp.*
>>
>> PCI ERROR RECOVERY
>> M:
>> +M: Gavin Shan <shangw at linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> Remove Linas, he isn't involved anymore as far as I can tell
> (are you ?)
Not involved any more; I don't have access to equipment, don't have
time, expertise is fading.
>> L: linux-pci at vger.kernel.org
>> +L: linuxppc-dev at lists.ozlabs.org
>> S: Supported
>> F: Documentation/PCI/pci-error-recovery.txt
>> F: Documentation/powerpc/eeh-pci-error-recovery.txt
>> +F: arch/powerpc/kernel/eeh*.c
>> +F: drivers/pci/pcie/aer/
>
> Not sure about the AER code. You are not maintaining *that* at least :-)
> Maybe we should split EEH from the rest ?
Based on recent discussions (a month ago?) regarding AER, its clear
that at least some of the AER code is mis-designed, and that some of
the patches being submitted against it were making things worse. I
suggest keeping an eye on that ... the problem is that both AER and
EEH share a common framework in the PCI subsystem. As bugs in AER get
discovered, there's a chance that someone will submit a patch to the
common framework, or possibly start modifying assorted drivers, which
will then break EEH ... so I don't think it is wise/safe to ignore
AER.
(The point is that AER and EEH really should work exactly the same;
they differ merely by how they talk to the root port).
-- Linas
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list