On Sat, Jan 12, 2008 at 09:45:57AM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:

quoted text
> btw this is my main objection to your patch; it intertwines the conf1

> and mmconfig code even more.

There is nothing wrong with it; please realize that mmconf and conf1 are

just different cpu-side interfaces. Both produce precisely the *same* bus

cycles as far as the lower 256-byte space is concerned.
> When (and I'm saying "when" not "if") systems arrive that only have

quoted text
> MMCONFIG for some of the devices, we'll have to detangle this again,

> and I'm really not looking forward to that.

MMCONFIG for *some* of the devices? This doesn't sound realistic

from technical point of view.

MMCONFIG-only systems? Sure. I really hope to see these. But it won't

be PC-AT architecture anymore. It has to be something like alpha,

for instance, fully utilizing the 64-bit address space, and we'll have

to have the whole low-level PCI infrastructure completely different

for these future platforms anyway.

Right now, each and every x86 chipset *does* require working

conf1 just in order to set up the mmconf aperture. It's the very

fundamental thing, sort of design philosophy.
Ivan.

--

unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/