Re: [PATCH] PCI: Only enable IO window if supported

[Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>]

On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 02:51:52PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> wrote:
> > On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 07:41:12AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >>
> >> > > I'd like res->flags to reflect the capabilities of the hardware, not
> >> > > whether the window is currently enabled.
> >> > >
> >> > Flag bits seem to be all taken. Could we use IORESOURCE_DISABLED for that
> >> > purpose, or could that cause conflicts elsewhere ?
> >>
> >> Yes, I think IORESOURCE_DISABLED would be appropriate for any I/O windows
> >> below a host bridge that doesn't support I/O space.
> >>
> > I integrated Lorenzo's patch and tried to get this working.
> >
> > Problem is that the use of a resource is widely checked with "!res->flags"
> > throughout the code. That would have to be changed to something like
> > "(!res->flags || (res->flags & IORESOURCE_DISABLED))" whereever it is used.
> >
> > I tried going with "!res->flags" instead, but have not been able to get it
> > to work realiably; it is just very difficult to distinguish if "!res->flags"
> > means that the resource has not yet been assigned or if it means that it is not
> > supported.
> >
> > The correct approach, in my opinion, would be to go with IORESOURCE_DISABLED
> > and make the necessary changes whereever needed. Effectively this means to
> > replace the "!res->flags" check with something like pci_res_used() [ pick
> > your preferred name ] and define it as
> >
> > #define pci_res_used(res) ((res)->flags && !((res)->flags & IORESOURCE_DISABLED))
> 
> I think that makes sense.  Maybe "res_valid()"?  It's not really
> PCI-specific, and "used" is a little ambiguous.  So is "valid", I
> admit.
> 
res_valid() sounds good to me. It is also nice and short.

Guenter