[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4BC4DFAD.9020600@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 14:18:37 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Yinghai <yinghai.lu@...cle.com>
CC: Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Andy Isaacson <adi@...apodia.org>, guenter.roeck@...csson.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2 1/2] x86: Reserve [0xa0000, 0x100000] in e820 map
On 04/13/2010 02:11 PM, Yinghai wrote:
>>
>> I guess the real question (which I haven't looked at myself) is if the
>> E820_RESERVED -> BUSY will cause an explicitly assigned BAR from being
>> moved. That's bad, not so much for this particular range, but from BARs
>> which may be assigned by SMM. Hacking that up in a simulator
>> (Qemu/Bochs) and testing it is probably on the to do list...
>
> no, if some device BAR fall in that range, it should still use that range, and will not be relocated.
>
> will update the change log.
>
Good, that's what we want.
ROM probing in this region should really be possible to skip, since the
only thing safe is to treat the whole region as special. This is not in
any way 32-bit-specific.
-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