From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
To: Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@hp.com>,
Mike Habeck <habeck@sgi.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
x86@kernel.org, Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@intel.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Yinghai <yinghai.lu@oracle.com>,
"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
Myron Stowe <myron.stowe@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch 1/1] x86 pci: Add option to not assign BAR's if not already assigned
Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 15:47:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100514154706.4f36f4ed@virtuousgeek.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4BEDCFD9.7020202@sgi.com>
On Fri, 14 May 2010 15:34:01 -0700
Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com> wrote:
>
>
> Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > On Thu, 13 May 2010 14:02:30 -0600
> > Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@hp.com> wrote:
> >>>> This issue is not specific to x86, so I don't really like having
> >>>> the implementation be x86-specific.
> >>> I agree this isn't a x86 specific issue but given the 'norom'
> >>> cmdline option is basically doing the same thing (but for pci
> >>> Expansion ROM BARs) this code was modeled after it.
>
> >> IMHO, we should fix both.
> >
> > Yeah, that would be good. Mike, have you looked at this at all?
> >
> > Also, to clarify, this isn't affecting users today, right? Or do you
> > need all this I/O space for multiple IOHs and the drivers that bind to
> > them in current UV systems?
>
> We have customers that want to install more than 16 PCI-e cards right
> now. Our window of opportunity closes very soon (days), so either this
> patch makes it in as is (or something close), or we wait for another
> release cycle. UV shipments start this month.
>
> [I wouldn't mind working on an improvement for later.]
Wow and they're using cards that want to use I/O space? Funky. It's
too late to get this into 2.6.34, but that can't be what you were
expecting... I don't see a problem with getting something like this in
for 2.6.35.
> > Fundamentally, until we have real dynamic PCI resource management (i.e.
> > driver hooks for handling relocation, lazy allocation of resources at
> > driver bind time, etc.) we're going to continue to need hacks like
> > this. However, we could make them slightly more automated by making
> > "nobar" and "norom" the default on systems that typically need them,
> > maybe with a DMI table.
>
> It seems that BIOS changes are much more difficult. The real solution
> to this problem is for Card Vendors to not request I/O Bars if they
> won't be using them. But that's the hardest option of all to accomplish.
Right.
--
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-14 22:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-12 18:14 [Patch 1/1] x86 pci: Add option to not assign BAR's if not already assigned Mike Travis
2010-05-13 18:56 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2010-05-13 19:08 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-13 19:12 ` Mike Travis
2010-05-13 19:13 ` Mike Travis
2010-05-13 19:54 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2010-05-13 20:27 ` Mike Habeck
2010-05-13 19:38 ` Mike Habeck
2010-05-13 20:02 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2010-05-13 20:09 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-14 22:25 ` Jesse Barnes
2010-05-14 22:34 ` Mike Travis
2010-05-14 22:35 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-14 22:40 ` Mike Travis
2010-05-15 2:25 ` Mike Travis
2010-05-14 22:47 ` Jesse Barnes [this message]
2010-05-14 22:59 ` Mike Travis
2010-05-14 23:06 ` Jesse Barnes
2010-05-14 23:23 ` Mike Travis
2010-05-14 23:33 ` Jesse Barnes
2010-05-14 23:40 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-15 0:02 ` Jesse Barnes
2010-05-14 23:20 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-14 23:28 ` Jesse Barnes
2010-05-14 23:32 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-14 23:34 ` Jesse Barnes
2010-05-14 23:39 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-15 0:00 ` Jesse Barnes
2010-05-15 0:14 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-13 20:36 ` Yinghai Lu
2010-05-13 20:34 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-13 18:58 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2010-05-28 16:53 ` Mike Travis
2010-05-28 17:00 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-28 17:10 ` Mike Travis
2010-05-28 19:28 ` Jesse Barnes
2010-05-28 20:04 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-31 11:12 ` Mike Travis
2010-05-31 16:36 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-06-01 22:49 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2010-06-02 7:31 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-06-02 15:45 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2010-06-02 15:47 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-06-02 15:53 ` Jesse Barnes
2010-06-09 0:53 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-06-09 1:26 ` Jesse Barnes
2010-06-09 14:23 ` Mike Habeck
2010-06-02 15:53 ` Mike Habeck
2010-06-02 16:40 ` 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=20100514154706.4f36f4ed@virtuousgeek.org \
--to=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
--cc=bjorn.helgaas@hp.com \
--cc=habeck@sgi.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jacob.jun.pan@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=myron.stowe@hp.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=travis@sgi.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yinghai.lu@oracle.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).