[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071213102424.18b621a7@the-village.bc.nu>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 10:24:24 +0000
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>
Cc: Robert Hancock <hancockr@...w.ca>, benh@...nel.crashing.org,
linux-pci@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Possible issue with dangling PCI BARs
> So disabling memory or IO decode in a command register seems to be
> the only safe option. This depends on architecture, though.
You are assuming a degree of sanity that seems unwise (at least for PC
class hardware).
Whether a given BAR is decoded depends not only on the contents of the
BAR but also the hardware configuration *specific* to the device.
The SIL680 for example has an MMIO BAR at BAR5. Control for that BAR is
via MMIO_EN which is a bit in PCI config register 0x8A.
So if we disable the device because of a dangling BAR the users root file
system goes away. If we leave it as is we have to know the
firmware/hardware came up with that BAR disabled or how to control it at
a per device level.
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)
Alan
--
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