[lkml]   [2002]   [Sep]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: BUG: PCI driver 64-bit bar size
On Thursday 05 September 2002 20:16, Todd Inglett wrote:
> Now in my case, I have an adapter that insists the upper 32-bits of a
> 64-bit BAR must be zero (don't ask me why -- doesn't make sense to me
> either, but they are indeed hard-wired). So after plugging in ffff's
> into both BARs I effectively get 0x00000000fffff000 (again after masking
> flags). I would expect a length of 0x1000 for this (extent 0xfff), but
> Linux computes an extent of 0xffffffffffffffff! Since the spec says the
> length is computed from the first one bit I'll assume this is wrong.
> The code should account for the lower dword as well as the upper.
> So my fix is attached. I chose to use pci_size() in the computation of
> the upper dword for consistency. Perhaps there should be a defined mask
> for the upper dword in pci.h (i.e. PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_64_MASK?) rather
> than hard coding 0xffffffff. The patch is against 2.4.20-pre4.

A bug fix like this should at least be cc'd to Marcelo.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:28    [W:0.031 / U:2.584 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site