[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <PSXP216MB043839BFAE70C02DB13DEA4A80310@PSXP216MB0438.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2020 15:00:11 +0000
From: Nicholas Johnson <nicholas.johnson-opensource@...look.com.au>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [[RFC PATCH v1] 1/1] PCI: Add pci=nobbn to ignore ACPI _BBN
method to override host bridge bus window
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 11:13:13PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Nicholas,
>
> Nicholas Johnson <nicholas.johnson-opensource@...look.com.au> writes:
>
> > Add pci=nobbn kernel parameter.
> >
> > Override the host bridge bus resource to [bus 00-ff] when specified.
>
> Fine, but you completely fail to explain why this is useful and why
> someone would utilize this command line parameter.
There are motherboards with single PCIe root complex which give
significantly less than [bus 00-ff] via CRS. I own one with [bus 00-7f]
and have seen some with significantly less.
A user who wants to use more busses than the motherboard advertises will
want to use this kernel parameter, for instance if they have a lot of
PCIe switches or Thunderbolt 3 devices.
This is similar to how we have pci=nocrs to override motherboards with
issues. The bus resource is not overridden by pci=nocrs, even though it
will usually come from the same method. However, I believe it would be
unwise to change pci=nocrs to include bus resource, as detailed in my
original RFC.
>
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
Thanks,
Nicholas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists