[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAErSpo7D_CDM+1mzO0ADdzbAE9xwnwiyJ-dk0WFthr+ReKpidg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 08:37:03 -0500
From: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
To: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Bugfix v5] x86/PCI/ACPI: Fix regression caused by commit 63f1789ec716
On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 8:33 AM, Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> On 2015/4/29 21:20, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 7:40 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net> wrote:
>>> On Monday, April 20, 2015 11:08:58 AM Jiang Liu wrote:
>>>> + *
>>>> + * Another possible solution is to explicitly filter out IO
>>>> + * port[0xCF8-0xCFF].
>>>> + */
>>>> + res_flags = IORESOURCE_IO | IORESOURCE_MEM | IORESOURCE_IO_FIXED;
>>
>> 2) The usage of IORESOURCE_IO_FIXED here seems like a hack. It's not
>> related to other existing use of IORESOURCE_IO_FIXED, and it's not
>> intuitive that supplying IORESOURCE_MEM means "I want all the
>> memory-type resources," but supplying IORESOURCE_IO_FIXED means "I
>> *don't* want the fixed I/O-type resources."
>
> Yes, the IORESOURCE_IO_FIXED is a hack here. Then how about explicitly
> filtering IOPORT [0xCF8-0xCFF] so we could avoid such a hack.
I'm OK with that, although it should be in an arch-specific hook or something.
--
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