[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200902071515.20560.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 15:15:20 -0800
From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Bug #12608] 2.6.29-rc powerpc G5 Xorg legacy_mem regression
On Friday, February 6, 2009 7:05 pm Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-02-06 at 14:45 -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > + if (Base <= 1024*1024) {
> > + /* Try legacy_mem (may not be available or implemented) */
> > + if ((fd = linuxOpenLegacy(dev, "legacy_mem")) < 0) {
> > + addr = mmap(NULL, Size, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED,
> > fd, Base); + close(fd);
> > + if (addr && addr != MAP_FAILED)
> > + return addr;
> > + }
> > }
> > - return addr;
> > +
> > + /* Fall back to old method if legacy_mem fails or Base >= 1M */
> > + return linuxMapPci(ScreenNum, Flags, dev, Base, Size,
> > PCIIOC_MMAP_IS_MEM); }
>
> I don't like the fallback if legacy_mem exists and returns an error,
> that's an indication that legacy memory is -not- available and thus
> whatever 'fallback' X will try (supposedly using /dev/mem) will be
> horribly broken and will probably end up scribbling all over system
> memory :-)
Yeah, but unless we fix all the callers (and possibly their callers), not
falling back will keep X from starting...
--
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@...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