From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Jesse Barnes <jesse.barnes@intel.com>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru>,
Robert Hancock <hancockr@shaw.ca>,
linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Possible issue with dangling PCI BARs
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 07:51:06 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1197579066.15741.167.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200712131204.18227.jesse.barnes@intel.com>
On Thu, 2007-12-13 at 12:04 -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote:
>
> Yeah, that seems like a reasonable compromise. Though in practice
> I'd
> expect the full disable decode approach to work fairly well too. I
> mean, if we really end up failing to allocate space for the device
> with
> the root drive on it, there are probably bigger issues than just
> failing to get a few bytes of I/O space for it...
>
The really bad scenario would be something like the Sil680 that Alan
talked about setup by a BIOS that "knows" about the unused BAR when
MMIO_EN is not set.
If the device is behind a P2P bridge and the BIOS has set the windows of
that bridge so tightly that there is no room to allocate the MMIO BAR,
then a full disable/full enable would fail on a device that would
otherwise work using only PIO.
However, I'd be curious to see that happening in practice :-)
But I think it's fair enough to do an IO only / MEM only approach. I've
seen cases where IO is just not useable because of other constraints and
so I expect the MEM-only case to be more common, especially on non-x86.
Ben.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-12-13 20:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <fa.YfTvVN5C3e6zwXPW5biWgeZ9XXc@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.EhUqlM3V3y3HCcQkLBLSEKTJxBs@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.4FjaYKIciOijtgO+0DDrMkrLjv0@ifi.uio.no>
2007-12-13 4:22 ` Possible issue with dangling PCI BARs Robert Hancock
2007-12-13 5:26 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-12-13 9:14 ` Ivan Kokshaysky
2007-12-13 9:29 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-12-13 9:04 ` Ivan Kokshaysky
2007-12-13 10:24 ` Alan Cox
2007-12-13 11:17 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-12-13 11:20 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-12-13 20:04 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-12-13 20:51 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2007-12-13 21:12 ` Ivan Kokshaysky
2007-12-13 23:09 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-12-13 21:02 ` Ivan Kokshaysky
2007-12-13 13:27 ` Alan Cox
2007-12-13 3:00 Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-12-13 3:04 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-12-13 3:40 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-12-14 11:52 ` Jon Masters
2007-12-14 22:11 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-12-15 2:18 ` Jon Masters
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=1197579066.15741.167.camel@pasglop \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=hancockr@shaw.ca \
--cc=ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru \
--cc=jesse.barnes@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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