From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Robert Hancock <hancockr@shaw.ca>
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 22:01:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <481AA042.7060101@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <481AA095.3010201@shaw.ca>
Robert Hancock wrote:
>>
>> Yes, considering all possible reservation schemes is really critical
>> here (including the magic knowledge of the legacy region).
>
> FYI, from what I've read, Windows ignores e820 for detecting resource
> reservations and looks at ACPI reservations only (at least if it's
> running in ACPI mode which these days is almost universal). It seems
> Windows really only uses e820 for locating RAM areas..
There is no doubt ACPI is critical. Using E820 is good practice too,
though. Windows actually uses (only) one of several methods, depending
on which HAL it chooses to use.
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-02 5:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[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 ` Why such a big difference in init-time PCI resource call-paths (x86 vs x86_64) ? Robert Hancock
2008-05-02 5:01 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2008-05-02 8:03 ` Andi Kleen
[not found] <1209571638.25051.54.camel@hephaestion.lan.tjworld.net>
2008-05-01 18:16 ` 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
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=481AA042.7060101@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=hancockr@shaw.ca \
--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 \
/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