Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 06 Dec 2010 21:17:33 +0100 | From | Jiri Slaby <> | Subject | Re: resource map sanity check conflict |
| |
On 11/24/2010 08:22 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Wednesday, November 24, 2010 06:36:01 am Jiri Slaby wrote: >> Hi, >> >> with 2.6.37-rc2 with some unrelated patches the following WARNING is >> generated: >> >> pnp 00:0a: [mem 0xfed40000-0xfed44fff] >> pnp 00:0a: Plug and Play ACPI device, IDs ATM1200 PNP0c31 (active) >> ... >> resource map sanity check conflict: 0xfed40000 0xfed44fff 0xfed44000 >> 0xfed44fff Intel Flush Page >> ------------[ cut here ]------------ >> WARNING: at arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c:98 __ioremap_caller+0x353/0x380() >> ... > >> /proc/iomem: >> fed1c000-fed8ffff : reserved >> fed1c000-fed1ffff : pnp 00:02 >> fed40000-fed4bfff : PCI Bus 0000:00 >> fed44000-fed44fff : Intel Flush Page >> fed45000-fed4bfff : pnp 00:02 >> >> >> Is it a result of the past resource handling rewrote? >> >> It seems like pci_bus_alloc_resource in >> intel_alloc_chipset_flush_resource chooses a weird place to put the >> mapping in. > > Yes, this is related to the PCI resource changes I made recently. > We used to allocate PCI resources from low addresses first and work > upwards, and now we do the reverse. So in 2.6.36, the "Intel Flush > Page" was probably allocated low in the [mem 0x7e000000-0xfebfffff] > window, but now we put it in the [mem 0xfed40000-0xfed4bfff] window: > > pci_root PNP0A08:00: host bridge window [mem 0x000dc000-0x000dffff] > pci_root PNP0A08:00: host bridge window [mem 0xfed40000-0xfed4bfff] > > I think the problem is that we ignore most of what ACPI tells us > about motherboard device resource usage. We do have the "system" > driver, which reserves resources used by PNP0c01 and PNP0c02 devices, > but we don't do anything about other devices like the ATM1200/PNP0c31 > device which, in your case, is using some of the space in that > [mem 0xfed40000-0xfed4bfff] host bridge window. > > I've been worried that this would bite us eventually, and I tried to > reserve all the ACPI resources in the PNP core a couple years ago, > but we had to revert that because it caused other problems. I still > think it's something we need to do after we straighten out the issues. > >> dmesg: >> https://bugzillafiles.novell.org/attachment.cgi?id=401414 >> lspci -vvnnxxx: >> https://bugzillafiles.novell.org/attachment.cgi?id=401643 >> /proc/iomem: >> https://bugzillafiles.novell.org/attachment.cgi?id=401476 > > Is there a kernel.org bugzilla about this? If not, could you open one > and assign it to me?
I created the bko entry some time ago: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23802
Any chance you will take a look?
> Does your system still work, despite the warning? It can't be good > that we put the flush page on top of the TPM device, but I don't know > what intel-gtt actually *does* with the flush page.
I think there is no problem other than the warning. I might ask the reporter if you want to know for sure.
thanks, -- js
| |