On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 20:36:59 -0500
Tony Camuso <tcamuso@redhat.com> wrote:

quoted text
> Thanks, Arjan.
> 
> The problem we have been experiencing has to do with Northbridges,
> not with devices.

correct for now.
HOWEVER, and this is the point Linus has made several times:
Just about NOBODY has devices that need the extended config space. At all.
So making this opt-in for devices allows our users to boot and use
their system if they are in the majority that has no need for even getting
close to this mess.

quoted text
> 
> As far as the device is concerned, after the Northbridge translates
> the config access into PCI bus cycles, the device has no idea what
> mechanism drove the Northbridge to the translation.

Wanne bet there'll be devices that screw this up? THere's devices that even screwed
up the 64-256 region after all.

quoted text
> The patch I devised concerned itself with Northbridges and separated
> MMCONFIG-compliant buses from those that could not handle MMCONFIG.

THis kind of patchup has been going on for the better part of a year (well 2 years)
by now and it's STILL NOT ENOUGH, as you can see by the more patchups that have
been proposed as "alternative" to my approach.

quoted text
> 
> In my humble opinion, Port IO config access is here to stay, having
> been defined as an architected mechanism in the PCI 2.1 spec.
> 
> This is most especially true for x86.
> 
> In other words, for x86, I don't think we need to worry about Port
> IO config access ever going away at all.

You're wrong there. Sad to say, but you're wrong there.

-- 
If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@linux.intel.com
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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/