[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091201205910.GB16534@lackof.org>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 13:59:10 -0700
From: Grant Grundler <grundler@...isc-linux.org>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc: Grant Grundler <grundler@...isc-linux.org>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...com>,
jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] PCI: Always set prefetchable base/limit upper32
registers
On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 12:40:03PM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
...
> > I assumed Yinghai's objection was based on a specific problem he had
> > seen with writing upper32 register. Bjorn asked the right question.
> > If there isn't a specific problem, I'd prefer AW's simpler patch.
>
> we just should not touch that register if the HW only support 32bit pref mmio.
Why not?
I agree the PCI-PCI spec defines how to determine if a PCI Bridge supports
64-bit Pref MMIO (using upper32 - or not). But spec also doesn't prohibit
writing to a read-only register. Writing this Read-Only register so far
hasn't caused any problems.
> > I'm also thinking the resource allocation design which uses resource
> > flags to indicate resources assigned (e.g a resource is 32-bit) rather
> > than HW attributes is broken. We should be able to allocate 32-bit Option
> > ROM into a 64-bit prefetchable MMIO window that is programmed with upper32
> > as zeros without changing the resource type. The resource allocation
> > code only be looking at Resource "Type" when (re)programming
> > window registers. The rest of the time (programming BARs) should be
> > able to just test "if it fits".
>
> IORESOURCE_MEM_64 is the flags that the resource could be assigned to >4g range.
> so it is NOT assigned resource ...
*shrug* I don't have time to work on the broader issue.
thanks,
grant
--
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