public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
To: Brice Goglin <brice@myri.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC] PCI extended conf space when MMCONFIG disabled because of e820
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 23:47:57 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4491029D.4060002@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4490BE76.6040008@myri.com>

> 
> Well, we are talking about using a different method to access the
> extended config space only. This space is independent from the legacy
> config space.

not really. In many ways it's the same space.

> I don't see how mixing the old and new methods like this could lead to
> any problem, we are not going to mix them to access the same registers.

the spec simply doesn't allow it. Sure it may work on your machine today,
but that doesn't make it a good idea ;)

> We need to improve this "mmconfig disabled" anyhow. Having the extended
> config space unavailable on lots of machines is also far from a viable
> solution :)

it's unlikely to be many machines though.

  If you still do not like this first proposal, what do you
> think of my other one ? (having chipset-specific checks in
> pci_mmcfg_init to find out for sure whether mmconfig will work)

I'm all in favor of a more detailed test; just we HAVE to have a test
for this since it's simply broken too often. What the test needs to do
is check if the MCFG entry actually points to a working mmconfig area,
so 1) that it actually points to an mmconfig area and not to garbage, and 2)
that accesses to it actually work ;)

the current approach doesn't test 2) realistically, only 1), but if you weaken
the 1) test as you propose you really ought to substitute it with a 2) test...


  reply	other threads:[~2006-06-15  6:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-06-14 21:07 [RFC] PCI extended conf space when MMCONFIG disabled because of e820 Brice Goglin
2006-06-14 21:09 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-06-15  1:45   ` Andi Kleen
2006-06-15  1:57   ` Brice Goglin
2006-06-15  6:47     ` Arjan van de Ven [this message]
2006-06-21 22:19       ` Rajesh Shah
2006-06-21 22:32         ` Andi Kleen
2006-06-22  0:15           ` Rajesh Shah
2006-06-22  9:27             ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-06-23  7:41               ` Rajesh Shah
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-06-15  8:41 Chuck Ebbert
2006-06-15 13:18 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-06-15 14:32   ` Barry Scott

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=4491029D.4060002@linux.intel.com \
    --to=arjan@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=ak@suse.de \
    --cc=brice@myri.com \
    --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