From: Jesse Barnes <jesse.barnes@intel.com>
To: Robert Hancock <hancockr@shaw.ca>
Cc: Olivier Galibert <galibert@pobox.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>, Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@redhat.com>,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] PCI MMCONFIG: add validation against ACPI motherboard resources
Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 14:06:59 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200705041406.59584.jesse.barnes@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200705021654.23730.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
On Wednesday, May 2, 2007 4:54 pm Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > What happens if you take out the chipset register detection, does
> > the MCFG table give you the same result? Wonder if they're doing
> > something funny with start/end bus values or something in their
> > table. There's some code in my patch that prints out the important
> > data from the MCFG table, can you tell me what that shows with the
> > chipset detection taken out?
>
> Yeah, I'll look a little more closely. It could also be that another
> register needs tweaking somewhere to actually get the bridge to
> decode the space.
>
> > If that doesn't provide any useful information, I think we may need
> > some assistance from Intel chipset/motherboard people to figure out
> > what is going on here..
>
> I'm talking with them now, hopefully they'll shed some light on it.
I did a little more debugging this morning, and found that I can
actually do reads from the space described by ACPI and the device
register, but later when ACPI actually scans the root bridges, it
hangs. Specifically the call to pci_acpi_scan_root in
pci_root.c:acpi_pci_root_add() never seems to return.
I'll walk through that logic when I get back to my test box, but it's
also worth noting that Vista's MCFG on this machine apparently works ok
too.
Jesse
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-04 21:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-04-30 2:14 [RFC PATCH] PCI MMCONFIG: add validation against ACPI motherboard resources Robert Hancock
2007-04-30 2:59 ` Randy Dunlap
2007-04-30 22:59 ` Olivier Galibert
2007-04-30 23:26 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-01 16:48 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-02 2:41 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-02 2:56 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-02 5:27 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-02 14:34 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-02 17:57 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-02 23:45 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-02 23:54 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-04 21:06 ` Jesse Barnes [this message]
2007-05-05 0:22 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-21 19:10 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-21 19:26 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-21 20:07 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-21 20:22 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 0:31 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-23 0:38 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 0:53 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-23 0:56 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 1:06 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-23 18:52 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 20:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 20:38 ` Alan Cox
2007-05-23 20:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 20:49 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 20:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 21:03 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 21:09 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-05-23 21:35 ` Alan Cox
2007-05-23 21:35 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-05-23 21:37 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 21:42 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-05-23 23:07 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-05-23 21:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 22:06 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 22:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 22:28 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 23:04 ` David Miller
2007-05-23 23:11 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 23:15 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-23 23:21 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 21:20 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 22:24 ` Olivier Galibert
2007-05-23 22:31 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-23 22:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 22:55 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-24 0:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-24 2:59 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-24 3:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-24 3:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-24 3:40 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-24 5:19 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-24 6:18 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-05-24 15:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-05-23 23:04 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-23 23:04 ` Robert Hancock
2007-05-23 23:06 ` Jesse Barnes
2007-05-24 0:02 ` Jesse Barnes
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=200705041406.59584.jesse.barnes@intel.com \
--to=jesse.barnes@intel.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=cebbert@redhat.com \
--cc=galibert@pobox.com \
--cc=hancockr@shaw.ca \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@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