[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100514162836.27e0325a@virtuousgeek.org>
Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 16:28:36 -0700
From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Mike Travis <travis@....com>, Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>,
Mike Habeck <habeck@....com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, x86@...nel.org,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...el.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Yinghai <yinghai.lu@...cle.com>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
Myron Stowe <myron.stowe@...com>
Subject: Re: [Patch 1/1] x86 pci: Add option to not assign BAR's if not
already assigned
On Fri, 14 May 2010 16:20:45 -0700
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> On 05/14/2010 03:47 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> >
> > Wow and they're using cards that want to use I/O space? Funky. It's
> > too late to get this into 2.6.34, but that can't be what you were
> > expecting... I don't see a problem with getting something like this in
> > for 2.6.35.
> >
>
> Most cards on the market provide I/O BARs as a convenience to legacy
> BIOSes; they don't need the I/O BAR functionality from inside a
> full-featured OS. There are a few, key, exceptions, mainly in the form
> of legacy-interface devices like UARTs and VGA (note that VGA has its
> own routing bits and is therefore unaffected by this problem.)
Yeah, it's the "legacy" part that I'm questioning. I'm just lamenting
that it's dying off so slowly...
And yes, VGA is an unfortunate standard.
--
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