[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0611080932320.3667@g5.osdl.org>
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 09:49:07 -0800 (PST)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>
cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
Jeff Chua <jeff.chua.linux@...il.com>,
Aaron Durbin <adurbin@...gle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
gregkh@...e.de, linux-pci@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz
Subject: Re: [discuss] Re: 2.6.19-rc4: known unfixed regressions (v3)
On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >
> > Anyway, I do not consider this a regression. MMCONFIG has _never_ worked
> > reliably. It has always been a case of "we can make it work on some
> > machines by making it break on others".
>
> It is a serious regression:
>
> The problem is that with the default CONFIG_PCI_GOANY, MMCONFIG is the
> _first_ method tried.
No. That was a bug at some point, but it's not that way now. See
pci_access_init(void)
which checks the pci_direct_probe() first, and only _then_ calls
pci_mmcfg_init(). And pci_mmcfg_init() will refuse to even use MMCONFIG
unless either the direct probe failed _or_ the MMCONFIG area is marked
entirely reserved in the e820 tables. Exactly because MMCONFIG generally
doesn't _work_.
Now, if that is indeed broken, then yes, we need to fix it.
Jeff - when you enable "direct PCI access", what is the printout? You
should get
PCI: Using configuration type 1
and the kernel should never have used MMCONFIG if the area wasn't marked
as reserved in e820..
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists