On Fri, 11 Apr 2014 15:55:17 +0200 Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Apparently stuff works that way on those machines. > > I agree with Chris' concern that this is a bit risky but imo worth a > shot in -next just for fun. Afaics all these machines have the pci > resources allocated like that by the BIOS, so I suspect that it's all > ok. > > Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=76983 > Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=71031 > Tested-by: lu hua <huax.lu@xxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_stolen.c | 6 +++++- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_stolen.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_stolen.c index > 62ef55ba061c..99d147af173a 100644 --- > a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_stolen.c +++ > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_stolen.c @@ -93,7 +93,11 @@ static > unsigned long i915_stolen_to_physical(struct drm_device *dev) r = > devm_request_mem_region(dev->dev, base + 1, dev_priv->gtt.stolen_size > - 1, "Graphics Stolen Memory"); > - if (r == NULL) { > + /* > + * GEN3 firmware likes to smash pci bridges into the > stolen > + * range. Apparently this works. > + */ > + if (r == NULL && !IS_GEN3(dev)) { > DRM_ERROR("conflict detected with stolen > region: [0x%08x - 0x%08x]\n", base, base + > (uint32_t)dev_priv->gtt.stolen_size); base = 0; Yeah just to allay fears: the decode priority on the GMCH is fixed and specific. The stolen range is demarcated by some regs which the GMCH decodes before it tries going out into PCI space. So it's safe to see the stolen range under the bus0 window (probably even under some device window down the range) but does make things messier for us. Reviewed-by: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Looks like the reporter gave a t-b too. Jesse _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
