lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Dec]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: Possible issue with dangling PCI BARs
    Date
    On Thursday, December 13, 2007 3:20 Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
    > > > Supporting pci_enable_device_io / pci_enable_device_mmio /
    > > > pci_iomap_io / pci_iomap_mmio seems to cover pretty much all the
    > > > use cases we have.
    > > >
    > > > The users we have right now that are:
    > > >
    > > > - pata_cs5520 (can be dealt with easily)
    > > > - old IDE (with the new resource handling for
    > > > legacy IDE can use pci_enable_device_io I think, ditto
    > > > pci/cs5520)
    > > > - scx200_acb (looks like a simple substitution works)
    > > > - lpfc pci_enable_device_mmio
    > > > - qla2xxx pci_enable_device ? (enables IO and MMIO)
    >
    > I may have not fully undestood you in my previous reply. You are
    > proposing replacing pci_enable_device_bars() with a pair of
    > pci_enable_device_io/mem ?
    >
    > I think that would be a good idea indeed.

    Yeah, that seems like a reasonable compromise. Though in practice I'd
    expect the full disable decode approach to work fairly well too. I
    mean, if we really end up failing to allocate space for the device with
    the root drive on it, there are probably bigger issues than just
    failing to get a few bytes of I/O space for it...

    OTOH like Robert said, many devices really only need either MMIO or IO
    space enabled, not both, so having separate enable/disable routines for
    them makes a lot of sense.

    Jesse


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-12-13 21:13    [W:0.022 / U:32.592 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site