On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 09:04:09AM -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:24:59 +0200
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > When probing for ROM BAR size, we should not
> > change bits 1:10 in this BAR, because these
> > bits are marked as "reserved for future use" in PCI spec,
> > so changing them might have side effects.
> >
> > No such issue for I/O or memory, as there is
> > an implementation note in PCI spec which explicitly allows
> > writing 0xfffffffff there.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/pci/probe.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/probe.c b/drivers/pci/probe.c
> > index 8105e32..d65aae4 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/probe.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/probe.c
> > @@ -163,12 +163,12 @@ int __pci_read_base(struct pci_dev *dev, enum
> > pci_bar_type type, {
> > u32 l, sz, mask;
> >
> > - mask = type ? ~PCI_ROM_ADDRESS_ENABLE : ~0;
> > + mask = type ? PCI_ROM_ADDRESS_MASK : ~0;
> >
> > res->name = pci_name(dev);
> >
> > pci_read_config_dword(dev, pos, &l);
> > - pci_write_config_dword(dev, pos, mask);
> > + pci_write_config_dword(dev, pos, l | mask);
> > pci_read_config_dword(dev, pos, &sz);
> > pci_write_config_dword(dev, pos, l);
>
> Applied to linux-next, thanks. Another possible enhancement here would
> be to make the mask into a switch based on the type, since mem32 and
> mem64 "BARs" (added by willy for doing BAR-like stuff) could probably
> use ~0 as well.
>
> Jesse
Where can I find the patch by willy that adds these?
--
MST
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
