From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>,
linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, TJ <linux@tjworld.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Why such a big difference in init-time PCI resource call-paths (x86 vs x86_64) ?
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 14:11:50 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <481A3216.9030705@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <86802c440805011410q17c24653l292ccb6dad211a06@mail.gmail.com>
Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 1:11 PM, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 01, 2008 at 11:16:31AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:07 am TJ wrote:
>> > > In preparation for writing a Windows-style PCI resource allocation
>> > > strategy
>> > >
>> > > - use all e820 gaps for IOMEM resources; top-down allocation -
>> > >
>> > > and thus giving devices with large IOMEM requirements more chance of
>> > > allocation in the 32-bit address space below 4GB (see bugzilla #10461),
>>
>> I tried that some time ago and it turned out that some systems have
>> mappings in holes and don't boot anymore when you fill the holes too much.
>> But that was only considering e820. if you do this it might work if you
>> do it really like windows and consider all resources, including ACPI.
>
> wonder if using holes in MTRR AND e820 could help...
>
Typically not, since the MTRRs won't tell you what is free address space
and what is occupied by non-BAR I/O devices.
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-01 21:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1209571638.25051.54.camel@hephaestion.lan.tjworld.net>
2008-05-01 18:16 ` Why such a big difference in init-time PCI resource call-paths (x86 vs x86_64) ? Jesse Barnes
2008-05-01 20:11 ` Andi Kleen
2008-05-01 20:11 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-05-01 20:29 ` Jesse Barnes
2008-05-01 21:10 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-05-01 21:11 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
[not found] <fa.GFIas4KVpQq9pUpviRWeT8L+oBs@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.hdrruKIvW+GZA0AESo+nBXNURSA@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.9Qhgua9PuRzPYMHNs+ZG5Q7/Hbg@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.sQSbKD/rf/mnDK28NkngvUl4UA8@ifi.uio.no>
2008-05-02 5:03 ` Robert Hancock
2008-05-02 5:01 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-05-02 8:03 ` Andi Kleen
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=481A3216.9030705@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz \
--cc=linux@tjworld.net \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=yhlu.kernel@gmail.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