Re: [patch] Ignore MCFG if the mmconfig area isn't reserved in thee820 table

[Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>]

Ashok Raj wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 04:42:17PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>> Andi Kleen wrote:
>>> In theory they should be the same. What do you think is different?
>> in practice the x86-64 version returns "success" if there is one byte in the entire
>> memory range that complies with the requested type, even if the rest of the range is
>> of another type. What the ideal is for the purpose here is "is the entire range reserved",
>> but for now I'll settle for "is the start address reserved".
>>
>> (and yes you can express the "is the start address reserved" as a question to the current function for
>> a 1 byte range, I probably should do that I suppose)
> 
> or why not check
> 
> if (type == ei->type && start >= ei->addr && end <= (ei->addr + ei->size))
> 	return 1;
> 
> will this make the range check check stricter?

that's not going to cut it; you can have 2 e820 entries that together span the range