[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46F5816B.3070908@zytor.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:56:11 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
CC: Robert Hancock <hancockr@...w.ca>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
rajesh.shah@...el.com, jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org, greg@...ah.com,
patches@...-64.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [9/50] i386: validate against ACPI motherboard resources
Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>> We all know how correct ACPI tables are. Specifications are nice,
>>> reality tells a different story.
>> MMCONFIG can't be used without ACPI in any case unless we know where the
>> table is using chipset-specific knowledge (i.e. reading the registers
>> directly). Doing that without being told that this area is really
>> intended to be used, via the ACPI table, is dangerous, i.e. we don't
>> necessarily know if the MMCONFIG is broken on the platform in some way
>> we can't detect.
>
> the BIOS get these info from the chipset too.
> for AMD Fam 10h opteron, we can read that MSR for MMCONFIG base.
I think he's saying we don't know a safe place to park the MMCONFIG area
if we don't have this information. However, this applies to *any*
allocation of address space, which we do all the time, so although a
valid argument this has been decided already many times over.
-hpa
-
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