lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Nov]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/3] PCI: Maintain a list of FW-assigned BIOS BAR values
From
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 17:43:51 -0700
> Myron Stowe <myron.stowe@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Myron Stowe <mstowe@redhat.com>
>>
>> Commit 58c84eda075 introduced functionality to try and reinstate the
>> original BIOS BAR addresses of a PCI device when normal resource
>> assignment attempts fail.  To keep track of the BIOS BAR addresses,
>> struct pci_dev was augmented with an array to hold the BAR addresses
>> of the PCI device: 'resource_size_t fw_addr[DEVICE_COUNT_RESOURCE]'.
>>
>> The reinstatement of BAR addresses is an uncommon event leaving the
>> 'fw_addr' array unused normally.  As the use of struct pci_dev is so
>> prevalent, this seems wasteful.
>>
>> This patch introduces a stand alone data structure and corresponding set
>> of interfacing routines for maintaining a list of FW-assigned BIOS BAR
>> value temporary entries.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Myron Stowe <myron.stowe@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>
>>  drivers/pci/setup-res.c |   73 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  include/linux/pci.h     |    1 +
>>  2 files changed, 74 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/setup-res.c b/drivers/pci/setup-res.c
>> index ad8c4ae..ab45c11 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pci/setup-res.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pci/setup-res.c
>> @@ -26,6 +26,79 @@
>>  #include "pci.h"
>>
>>
>> +/*
>> + * This list of dynamic mappings is for temporarly maintaining
>> + * original BIOS BAR addresses for possbile reinstatement.
>> + */
>> +struct pci_fwaddrmap {
>> +     struct list_head list;
>> +     struct pci_dev *dev;
>> +     resource_size_t fw_addr[DEVICE_COUNT_RESOURCE];
>> +     unsigned long refcount;
>> +};
>> +
>> +static LIST_HEAD(pci_fwaddrmappings);
>> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(pci_fwaddrmap_lock);
>
> Is the refcounting really needed?  Can't we just free the whole list at
> some point to simplify things a bit?

No, refcounting is not absolutely necessary, it's just the approach I came
up with initially. I'll look into just freeing the entire list once we are done
with it.

Myron
>
> --
> Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
>
--
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-11-14 18:49    [W:0.071 / U:21.768 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site