On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Stephan Schreiber <info@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hello Bjorn, > thank you very much for the patch. > I tested it; it works. > > (typing mistake: it must read PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY instead of PCI_COMMAND_MEM > at one location; > some hunks of the patch couldn't be applied automatically on Kernel 3.2.23 > because some comments in the contexts are different) Thanks a lot for testing this! I'll fix up this typo and work on getting something like this merged. > The dmesg output: > > [ 0.000000] Initializing cgroup subsys cpuset > [ 0.000000] Initializing cgroup subsys cpu > [ 0.000000] Linux version 3.2.0-3-mckinley (Debian 3.2.23-1) > (debian-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) (gcc version 4.6.3 (Debian 4.6.3-8) ) #1 > SMP Fri Sep 28 21:57:11 CEST 2012 > ... > [ 0.065510] pci 0000:00:1f.1: [8086:24cb] type 0 class 0x000101 > [ 0.065524] pci 0000:00:1f.1: reg 10: [io 0x0000-0x0007] > [ 0.065535] pci 0000:00:1f.1: reg 14: [io 0x0000-0x0003] > [ 0.065546] pci 0000:00:1f.1: reg 18: [io 0x0000-0x0007] > [ 0.065556] pci 0000:00:1f.1: reg 1c: [io 0x0000-0x0003] > [ 0.065567] pci 0000:00:1f.1: reg 20: [io 0x1000-0x100f] > [ 0.065578] pci 0000:00:1f.1: reg 24: [mem 0x00000000-0x000003ff unset] > ... > [ 1.391380] libata version 3.00 loaded. > [ 1.391922] ata_piix 0000:00:1f.1: version 2.13 > [ 1.391938] ata_piix 0000:00:1f.1: can't derive routing for PCI INT A > [ 1.392493] scsi0 : ata_piix > [ 1.392886] scsi1 : ata_piix > [ 1.393018] ata1: PATA max UDMA/100 cmd 0x1f0 ctl 0x3f6 bmdma 0x1000 irq > 34 > [ 1.393066] ata2: PATA max UDMA/100 cmd 0x170 ctl 0x376 bmdma 0x1008 irq > 33 > [ 1.557756] ata1.00: ATAPI: HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GSA-T40N, JR03, max UDMA/33 > [ 1.573616] ata1.00: configured for UDMA/33 > [ 1.579147] scsi 0:0:0:0: CD-ROM HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GSA-T40N > JR03 PQ: 0 ANSI: 5 > [ 1.590806] sr0: scsi3-mmc drive: 24x/24x writer dvd-ram cd/rw xa/form2 > cdda tray > [ 1.590872] cdrom: Uniform CD-ROM driver Revision: 3.20 > [ 1.591272] sr 0:0:0:0: Attached scsi CD-ROM sr0 > [ 1.593910] sr 0:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg0 type 5 > ... >> On x86, Windows normally doesn't reconfigure PCI devices unless it >> finds a problem with the configuration done by the BIOS. I suspect >> it works similarly on ia64. I would guess that Windows noticed that >> the MEM bit was not set, and therefore ignored the MEM BAR contents. > > > Since I have the four Windows versions 'for Itanium Based Systems' on that > box as well (XP, Server 2003, 2008, 2008 R2), I can tell you more: > The Device Manager shows a memory range FFBFFC00-FFBFFFFF for the "Intel > 82801DB Ultra ATA Storage Controller-24CB" - on any of these Windows > versions. Oh, that's good data, thanks! It looks like Windows noticed that the BAR was invalid and assigned a valid resource to it. That's in the third aperture below: ACPI: PCI Root Bridge [PCI0] (domain 0000 [bus 00-01]) pci_root PNP0A03:00: host bridge window [mem 0x000a0000-0x000fffff] pci_root PNP0A03:00: host bridge window [mem 0xfa000000-0xfbffffff] pci_root PNP0A03:00: host bridge window [mem 0xff000000-0xffffffff] pci_root PNP0A03:00: host bridge window [mem 0xfec00000-0xfec0ffff] Linux *should* probably do the same (though at a different actual address because we assign bottom-up instead of top-down as Windows does). I don't know off the top of my head whether we actually do in this case or not. What's the output of "dmesg | grep 0000:00:1f.1; lspci -vs00:1f.1"? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
