[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <86802c440805131048r2f027809pe972a5e27321c2b0@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 10:48:03 -0700
From: "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
To: "Gary Hade" <garyhade@...ibm.com>
Cc: jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: boot parameter to avoid expansion ROM memory allocation
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 3:30 PM, Gary Hade <garyhade@...ibm.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 02:43:44PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> > On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 1:57 PM, Gary Hade <garyhade@...ibm.com> wrote:
> <snip>
>
> > > --- linux-2.6.26-rc2/arch/x86/pci/common.c.orig 2008-05-12 10:59:58.000000000 -0700
> > > +++ linux-2.6.26-rc2/arch/x86/pci/common.c 2008-05-12 11:22:05.000000000 -0700
> > > @@ -121,6 +121,21 @@ void __init dmi_check_skip_isa_align(voi
> > > dmi_check_system(can_skip_pciprobe_dmi_table);
> > > }
> > >
> > > +static void __devinit pcibios_fixup_device_resources(struct pci_dev *dev)
> > > +{
> > > + struct resource *rom_r = &dev->resource[PCI_ROM_RESOURCE];
> > > +
> > > + if (pci_probe & PCI_NOASSIGN_ROMS) {
> > > + if (rom_r->parent)
> > > + return;
> > > + if (rom_r->start) {
> > > + /* we deal with BIOS assigned ROM later */
> > > + return;
> > > + }
> > > + rom_r->start = rom_r->end = rom_r->flags = 0;
> > > + }
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > /*
> > > * Called after each bus is probed, but before its children
> > > * are examined.
> > > @@ -128,7 +143,11 @@ void __init dmi_check_skip_isa_align(voi
> > >
> > > void __devinit pcibios_fixup_bus(struct pci_bus *b)
> > > {
> > > + struct pci_dev *dev;
> > > +
> > > pci_read_bridge_bases(b);
> > > + list_for_each_entry(dev, &b->devices, bus_list)
> > > + pcibios_fixup_device_resources(dev);
> > > }
> >
> > or put check
> > + if (pci_probe & PCI_NOASSIGN_ROMS) {
> >
> > out of loop?
>
> I could certainly do that but I had intended that the new
> pcibios_fixup_device_resources function act as a container where
> other kinds of fixups could be added later. Do you (or others)
> think the additional cycles consumed by this approach are an
> issue here?
ok, then wonder if we can don't assign roms for x86_64 by default.
can we use pci rom in 64 bit kernel?
YH
--
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