Re: [PATCH] SERIAL: discover PNP ports before PCI, etc

[Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@hp.com>]

On Thu, 2005-02-10 at 12:37 -0500, Adam Belay wrote:
> > Wouldn't it be a bug if PNP described a resource that can be
> > discovered by standard PCI discovery?
> 
> Maybe.  It's usually one of these:
> 
> pnp: 00:09: ioport range 0x4d0-0x4d1 has been reserved
> pnp: 00:09: ioport range 0xcf8-0xcff could not be reserved
> pnp: 00:0b: ioport range 0x800-0x87f has been reserved
> 
> The "could not be reserved" was touched by pci.  From memory, I think
> it's the pci configuration range.

Right.  0xcf8-0xcff is reserved in pci_direct_init(), which is
part of the arch PCI core, not part of a driver.  So I don't
think the 8250 PCI/PNP order should make a difference for this
particular range (the arch PCI init happens long before either
8250 PCI or PNP claim).

> > I think we should move PNP before PCI and fix whatever resource
> > problems crop up.
> 
> We could always add this change to -mm and see what effect it has.  Let me
> know if you still think this makes sense.

Yeah, I think that's Russell's plan, which I think is the right one.