From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@debian.org>
To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Latest 2.4 IA64 Baseline (Bjorn) + Latest ACPI testing report
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 12:23:20 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-linux-ia64-107166381724629@msgid-missing> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <marc-linux-ia64-106863619315583@msgid-missing>
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 10:54:09AM +0800, Yu, Luming wrote:
> >> I think "To bus device, resources returned from _CRS method means that bus device will
> >> supply those resouces to its children devices. So it's unreasonable to call
> >> request_resource for them."
>
> >That's faulty logic. Resources can either be busy (used at the leaf
> >by a driver) or merely containers for other resources (as they are in
> >this case).
>
> My concern is that if a device driver want to request a resource,
> but that resource has been allocated by bus device (which supply this resources to its children devices)
> then -EBUSY get returned. Maybe device driver can
> ignore this error. But how to detect a real resource conflict with other device (another resource consumer)? All of them return -EBUSY.
No, you don't understand how resources work. When device drivers request
them, they're marked as busy. When busses claim them, they're marked
as not-busy. Take a look at __request_region in kernel/resource.c.
It checks IORESOURCE_BUSY to see whether it can have the new resource
as a child of the existing one.
> > For example, when
> >PCI needs to allocate resources, if we don't partition the root resource
> >amongst the child busses, we could inadvertently allocate resources that
> >straddle two PCI busses, and that just won't work.
>
> All resources info returned from _CRS has been saved in pci_root_info->controller->window. Is it enough?
No, the generic PCI code knows nothing about this ACPI-specific
information. It relies on the resources being set up correctly.
--
"Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon
the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those
conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse
to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince
himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep
he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception." -- Mark Twain
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-12-17 12:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-11-12 11:22 Latest 2.4 IA64 Baseline (Bjorn) + Latest ACPI testing report Yu, Luming
2003-11-19 13:08 ` Yu, Luming
2003-11-20 0:33 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2003-11-20 3:28 ` Matthew Wilcox
2003-11-20 17:09 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2003-11-20 17:29 ` Luck, Tony
2003-12-10 10:29 ` Yu, Luming
2003-12-11 0:34 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2003-12-11 19:32 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2003-12-16 9:37 ` Yu, Luming
2003-12-16 12:17 ` Matthew Wilcox
2003-12-16 16:23 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2003-12-17 2:54 ` Yu, Luming
2003-12-17 3:07 ` Yu, Luming
2003-12-17 12:23 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2003-12-18 2:42 ` Yu, Luming
2003-12-18 12:14 ` Matthew Wilcox
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=marc-linux-ia64-107166381724629@msgid-missing \
--to=willy@debian.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox