On Wednesday 04 November 2009 12:51:39 pm Yinghai Lu wrote: > On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@xxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wednesday 04 November 2009 10:44:35 am Matthew Wilcox wrote: > >> On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 10:32:37AM -0700, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > >> > This series doesn't change any behavior; it just makes our messages > >> > about PCI resource management a little more consistent and complete. > >> > >> Could you give a before-and-after sample subset of dmesg? This looks > >> good, on its face, I just want to see examples. > > > > Sure. In the normal case, it's not terribly interesting -- I added some > > bridge discovery information and ROM BAR assignment messages, as in the > > HP DL380G6 diff below. It's more interesting when we find problems. I'll > > try to dig up an example of that, too. > > > > --- dl380g6a.old 2009-11-04 12:21:34.000000000 -0700 > > +++ dl380g6a.new 2009-11-04 12:22:11.000000000 -0700 > > @@ -324,8 +324,18 @@ > > pci 0000:04:00.0: supports D1 > > pci 0000:04:00.0: PME# supported from D0 > > pci 0000:04:00.0: PME# disabled > > +pci 0000:00:01.0: PCI bridge to [bus 04-04] > > pci 0000:00:01.0: bridge window [io 0x4000-0x4fff] > > pci 0000:00:01.0: bridge window [mem 0xfbb00000-0xfbffffff] > > +pci 0000:00:02.0: PCI bridge to [bus 05-05] > > +pci 0000:00:03.0: PCI bridge to [bus 10-12] > > +pci 0000:00:04.0: PCI bridge to [bus 13-13] > > +pci 0000:00:05.0: PCI bridge to [bus 14-16] > > +pci 0000:00:06.0: PCI bridge to [bus 17-19] > > +pci 0000:00:07.0: PCI bridge to [bus 0d-0f] > > +pci 0000:00:08.0: PCI bridge to [bus 0a-0c] > > +pci 0000:00:09.0: PCI bridge to [bus 07-09] > > +pci 0000:00:0a.0: PCI bridge to [bus 06-06] > > pci 0000:02:00.0: reg 10: [mem 0xf4000000-0xf5ffffff 64bit] > > pci 0000:02:00.0: reg 30: [mem 0x00000000-0x0000ffff pref] > > pci 0000:02:00.0: PME# supported from D0 D3hot D3cold > > @@ -334,6 +344,7 @@ > > pci 0000:02:00.1: reg 30: [mem 0x00000000-0x0000ffff pref] > > pci 0000:02:00.1: PME# supported from D0 D3hot D3cold > > pci 0000:02:00.1: PME# disabled > > +pci 0000:00:1c.0: PCI bridge to [bus 02-02] > > pci 0000:00:1c.0: bridge window [mem 0xf2000000-0xf5ffffff] > > maybe you can change to > pci 0000:00:1c.0: bridge window [bus 02-02] If you mean that you prefer this: pci 0000:00:1c.0: bridge window [bus 02-02] pci 0000:00:1c.0: bridge window [mem 0xf2000000-0xf5ffffff] instead of this: pci 0000:00:1c.0: PCI bridge to [bus 02-02] pci 0000:00:1c.0: bridge window [mem 0xf2000000-0xf5ffffff] I disagree because the bus number range is not like the MMIO and I/O port apertures. The bus range is effectively a qualifier on ALL the apertures of the bridge; it's not separate from them. I can imagine doing something like this: pci 0000:00:01.0: bridge window [io 0x4000-0x4fff] to [bus 04-04] pci 0000:00:01.0: bridge window [mem 0xfbb00000-0xfbffffff] to [bus 04-04] That has the advantage that each line is self-contained, so you don't need the preceeding "PCI bridge" line to make sense out of it. I wouldn't be opposed to that, but I don't know if there's enough advantage to make it worth changing. I don't want to get rid of the "PCI bridge" line completely, though, at least for subtractive-decode bridges. Bjorn -- 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
