[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E77FBA4.3080907@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 10:34:12 +0800
From: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
CC: Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] ACPI, APEI, Resolve false conflict between ACPI NVS
and APEI
On 09/20/2011 10:09 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 7:38 PM, Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com> wrote:
>> Some firmware will access memory in ACPI NVS region via APEI. That
>> is, instructions in APEI ERST/EINJ table will read/write ACPI NVS
>> region. The original resource conflict checking in APEI code will
>> check memory/ioport accessed by APEI via general resource management
>> mech. But ACPI NVS region is marked as busy already, so that the
>> false resource conflict will prevent APEI ERST/EINJ to work.
>>
>> To fix this, this patch excludes ACPI NVS regions when APEI components
>> request resources. So that they will not conflict with ACPI NVS
>> regions.
>
> I think this is much, much too complicated.
>
> Yinghai's three-line e820.c patch to leave ACPI NVS regions in the
> iomem_resource tree, but as not busy, is far better.
ACPI NVS should only be used by firmware or firmware interpreter instead
of the ordinary drivers. So I think that is reasonable to make it busy
in iomem resource tree.
Best Regards,
Huang Ying
--
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