[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4C067D0B.7030804@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2010 17:47:23 +0200
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>
CC: Mike Travis <travis@....com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, x86@...nel.org,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...el.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Mike Habeck <habeck@....com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch 1/1] x86 pci: Add option to not assign BAR's if not already
assigned
On 06/02/2010 05:45 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 02, 2010 01:31:18 am H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 06/01/2010 03:49 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>>>
>>>> BIOS still assigns the MMIO BAR's so the devices are alive.
>>>
>>> I'm sorry; I don't follow this. BIOS assigns MMIO BARs regardless
>>> of whether we have your patch.
>>
>> I'm assuming that that Mike is implying is that the allocation code runs
>> out of I/O space and as a result shuts down the entire device.
>
> Yeah, that's why I asked about a deeper problem. There's not really a
> "shut down this device" flag, so the only way I can think of that we
> might make a device completely unusable is if we release all the device
> resources and then fail to reassign them.
>
> A concrete example, e.g., a dmesg log, would go a long ways toward
> clarifying this.
>
That's what I thought, which I guess means my original question to Mike
still stands...
-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