From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Zhou Wang <wangzhou1@hisilicon.com>,
Phil Edworthy <phil.edworthy@renesas.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] ARM/ARM64 PCI_PROBE_ONLY platforms
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 17:06:45 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160129230645.GG12965@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <569FB210.9090605@codeaurora.org>
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 11:13:04AM -0500, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> On 1/20/2016 11:04 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> >
> > We want to get rid of PCI_PROBE_ONLY on ARM/ARM64:
>
> For platforms that does not have UEFI BIOS, it makes sense to remove the probe only
> option as the firmware is not doing anything.
I don't understand this statement. It sounds like you mean "non-UEFI
BIOS firmware doesn't assign PCI BARs", but that's not true, so you
must mean something else.
> For server like arm64 platforms, the behavior should be identical to
> x86 world.
> The UEFI BIOS sets up the resources, kernel uses the resources.
Is there actually a requirement that a UEFI BIOS assign resources to
PCI BARs? I know that historically, x86 BIOS has set up most or all
PCI BARs. But I thought there was something in UEFI that relaxed
that, so it would only have to program BARs for the boot and console
devices it actually needed. But I can't find a spec reference either
way.
Bjorn
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-29 23:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-20 16:04 [RFC] ARM/ARM64 PCI_PROBE_ONLY platforms Lorenzo Pieralisi
2016-01-20 16:13 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-01-20 18:10 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2016-01-20 18:15 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-01-29 23:26 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-01-22 16:28 ` Phil Edworthy
2016-01-25 17:51 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2016-01-28 17:27 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2016-01-29 12:02 ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-01-29 6:32 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-01-29 23:25 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-02-01 16:28 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2016-02-01 21:19 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-01-29 23:06 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2016-01-30 0:14 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-01-30 13:30 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-01-30 17:51 ` Okaya
2016-02-01 15:25 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2016-02-01 21:12 ` Bjorn Helgaas
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=20160129230645.GG12965@localhost \
--to=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=okaya@codeaurora.org \
--cc=phil.edworthy@renesas.com \
--cc=wangzhou1@hisilicon.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).