login
Header Space

 
 

Re: [patch] pci: revert "PCI: remove transparent bridge sizing"

Score:
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...>
Cc: Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...>, Gary Hade <garyhade@...>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>, Thomas Meyer <thomas@...>, Stefan Richter <stefanr@...>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...>, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...>, LKML <linux-kernel@...>, Adrian Bunk <bunk@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, Natalie Protasevich <protasnb@...>, <pm@...>
Date: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 - 6:31 pm

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:

x86 has memory there, always has had, probably always will.

Also, the reason I *think* this issue is ok is that I think the only PCI 
bus resources we can see in the whole pdev_sort_resources() mess is the 
ones that are behind the bus that we're not sizing for, and they've been 
set up by pbus_size_mem().

And pbus_size_mem() has this special magic setup where it calculates the 
size and the alignment of the bus resource, and then makes

	r->start = alignment;
	r->end = r->start + size - 1;

so using "r->start" *should* be ok in this case because it really means 
"alignment" in this one case.

That said, I'm not going to be willing to bet my life on it.

I also wonder if we maybe should just add a separate "alignment" field to 
the resources. Rather than playing games like these (and having to compare 
the resource number to decide whether it is a bus resource or a normal PCI 
device resource), just adding the dang field would be a whole lot saner.

I dunno. I'm not going to do anything in this area before 2.6.25 is out 
because this *does* make me a bit nervous, but if somebody wants to think 
about this and perhaps write patches for testing, that would be good.

And once more: Ivan, can you again double-check my blatherings above?

			Linus
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
2.6.25-rc6-git6: Reported regressions from 2.6.24, Rafael J. Wysocki, (Fri Mar 21, 9:59 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-rc6-git6: Reported regressions from 2.6.24, Linus Torvalds, (Mon Mar 31, 2:21 pm)
2.6.25-rc7/8: Another resume regression, Mark Lord, (Thu Apr 3, 3:06 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-rc7/8: Another resume regression, Mark Lord, (Fri Apr 4, 10:27 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-rc7/8: Another resume regression, Rafael J. Wysocki, (Mon Apr 7, 6:51 am)
Re: 2.6.25-rc7/8: Another resume regression, Mark Lord, (Mon Apr 7, 11:51 am)
Re: 2.6.25-rc7/8: Another resume regression, Rafael J. Wysocki, (Mon Apr 7, 1:40 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-rc7/8: Another resume regression, Mark Lord, (Tue Apr 8, 11:35 am)
Re: 2.6.25-rc6-git6: Reported regressions from 2.6.24, Tino Keitel, (Mon Mar 31, 5:04 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-rc6-git6: Reported regressions from 2.6.24, Tino Keitel, (Mon Mar 31, 5:26 pm)
Re: [patch] pci: revert "PCI: remove transparent bridge sizi..., Benjamin Herrenschmidt, (Wed Mar 26, 7:45 pm)
Re: [patch] pci: revert "PCI: remove transparent bridge sizi..., Benjamin Herrenschmidt, (Wed Mar 26, 5:57 pm)
Re: [patch] pci: revert "PCI: remove transparent bridge sizi..., Linus Torvalds, (Wed Mar 26, 6:31 pm)
Re: [patch] pci: revert "PCI: remove transparent bridge sizi..., Benjamin Herrenschmidt, (Wed Mar 26, 7:17 pm)
Re: [patch] pci: revert "PCI: remove transparent bridge sizi..., Benjamin Herrenschmidt, (Wed Mar 26, 6:29 pm)
Re: [patch] pci: revert "PCI: remove transparent bridge sizi..., Benjamin Herrenschmidt, (Wed Mar 26, 6:54 pm)
Re: [patch] pci: revert "PCI: remove transparent bridge sizi..., Benjamin Herrenschmidt, (Wed Mar 26, 7:18 pm)
Re: [patch] pci: revert "PCI: remove transparent bridge sizi..., Benjamin Herrenschmidt, (Wed Mar 26, 6:27 pm)
Re: ohci1394 problem (MMIO broken) (was 2.6.25-rc6-git6: Rep..., Benjamin Herrenschmidt, (Wed Mar 26, 8:17 am)
Re: ohci1394 problem (MMIO broken) (was 2.6.25-rc6-git6: Rep..., Benjamin Herrenschmidt, (Tue Mar 25, 11:39 pm)
Re: ohci1394 problem (MMIO broken) (was 2.6.25-rc6-git6: Rep..., Benjamin Herrenschmidt, (Wed Mar 26, 7:25 pm)
Re: ohci1394 problem (MMIO broken) (was 2.6.25-rc6-git6: Rep..., Benjamin Herrenschmidt, (Tue Mar 25, 7:33 pm)
Re: ohci1394 problem (MMIO broken) (was 2.6.25-rc6-git6: Rep..., Benjamin Herrenschmidt, (Tue Mar 25, 8:12 pm)
Re: ohci1394 problem (MMIO broken) (was 2.6.25-rc6-git6: Rep..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Sat Mar 22, 1:58 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-rc6-git6: Reported regressions from 2.6.24, Jeff Garzik, (Fri Mar 21, 10:52 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-rc6-git6: Reported regressions from 2.6.24, Ingo Molnar, (Sat Mar 22, 7:11 am)
Re: 2.6.25-rc6-git6: Reported regressions from 2.6.24, Romano Giannetti, (Thu Mar 27, 6:18 am)
Re: 2.6.25-rc6-git6: Reported regressions from 2.6.24, Rafael J. Wysocki, (Wed Mar 26, 6:11 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-rc6-git6: Reported regressions from 2.6.24, Adrian Bunk, (Wed Mar 26, 1:02 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-rc6-git6: Reported regressions from 2.6.24, Heiko Carstens, (Sat Mar 22, 12:32 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-rc6-git6: Reported regressions from 2.6.24, Rafael J. Wysocki, (Sat Mar 22, 1:56 pm)
Re: 2.6.25-rc6-git6: Reported regressions from 2.6.24, Andrew Morton, (Sat Mar 22, 1:33 am)
Re: 2.6.25-rc6-git6: Reported regressions from 2.6.24, Ingo Molnar, (Sat Mar 22, 7:15 am)
Re: 2.6.25-rc6-git6: Reported regressions from 2.6.24, Rafael J. Wysocki, (Sat Mar 22, 1:53 pm)
speck-geostationary