Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Sun, 7 Aug 2005 13:49:59 +0400 | From | Ivan Kokshaysky <> | Subject | Re: [openib-general] Re: mthca and LinuxBIOS |
| |
On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 09:33:54PM -0700, Grant Grundler wrote: > > ISTR making comments before about the offending patch on linux-pci mailing > > list. Is this the same patch that assumes pci_dev->resource[i] == BAR[i] ? > > I meant the patch assume 1:1 for pci_dev->resource[i] and BAR[i]. > not that the two are equivalent.
This is correct assumption. For 64-bit BAR[i] only pci_dev->resource[i] is valid, pci_dev->resource[i+1] slot is unused and contains zeroes in all fields. So all we need is just to check that we're going to update a _valid_ resource. [Though, if we ever want to support >4Gb bus allocations on 32-bit architectures we need to make resource start and end fields u64.]
Ivan.
--- 2.6.13-rc5-git4/drivers/pci/setup-res.c Sun Aug 7 12:08:23 2005 +++ linux/drivers/pci/setup-res.c Sun Aug 7 13:27:54 2005 @@ -33,6 +33,11 @@ pci_update_resource(struct pci_dev *dev, u32 new, check, mask; int reg; + /* Ignore resources for unimplemented BARs and unused resource slots + for 64 bit BARs. */ + if (!res->flags) + return; + pcibios_resource_to_bus(dev, ®ion, res); pr_debug(" got res [%lx:%lx] bus [%lx:%lx] flags %lx for " @@ -67,7 +72,7 @@ pci_update_resource(struct pci_dev *dev, if ((new & (PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_SPACE|PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_MASK)) == (PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_SPACE_MEMORY|PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_64)) { - new = 0; /* currently everyone zeros the high address */ + new = region.start >> 32; pci_write_config_dword(dev, reg + 4, new); pci_read_config_dword(dev, reg + 4, &check); if (check != new) { - 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/
| |