Messages in this thread | | | From | Jesse Barnes <> | Subject | Re: PCI bridge range sizing bug | Date | Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:32:51 -0700 |
| |
On Friday, April 20, 2007 2:23 am Ivan Kokshaysky wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 05:19:20PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > I think we used to *never* assign PCI bus resources on x86, but > > that thing got fixed some time ago. Now I think we only re-assign > > them if they were unassigned *or* if the assignment wasn't working > > before. But I'm not 100% sure about that second part... It's been > > working so well that I don't think we've had a lot of problems with > > resource assignment lately, and I've paged it all out of my brain. > > > > Ivan, can you remind my tired old brain? > > No :-) You are absolutely right - we re-assign only unassigned OR > conflicting resources. And yes, x86 kernel does accept any enabled > bridge ranges without looking at what is on the other side of the > bridge. > > I think what we need is some very minimalistic validity check for > BIOS bridge setup: calculate sums of resource ranges of each type > (or just MEM and PREFETCH, should we care about IO these days?) > for devices that are behind the bridge, even without taking alignment > requirements into account. Then, if some window is too small, we just > let the pci_assign_unassigned_resources to take care of that.
Sounds good, hopefully reassigning the bridge resources won't cause too much trouble. Do you have time to hack this up? If not, I could give it a try, as long as ajax is willing to test...
Thanks, Jesse - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |