I don't think it's sufficient, actually. We regularly see machines where devices point into e820_reserved memory above 1 MB - because it's a platform device or because firmware (e.g. smm) is touching the device. I think Bjorn's fix is great for .34, but longer term I think we need to structure the code to actually handle reserved regions differently from occupied/forbidden regions. "Jesse Barnes" <jbarnes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >On Mon, 26 Apr 2010 14:44:50 -0700 >"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> > Agreed. The trickier part is handling any platform devices that >> > request_resource against that space. But maybe we don't need to do >> > anything special; just making sure we avoid it in the PCI "BIOS" code >> > as Bjorn did may be sufficient. >> > >> >> Why is that hard? If a platform device does a request_resource against >> that space, it's a request for specific address space and it should be >> granted. > >I was thinking if we made it a special resource type we'd have to >change any platform drivers to use it; i.e. it wouldn't be >IORESOURCE_MEM or IORESOURCE_IO but IORESOURCE_DRAGONS. That way it >wouldn't be part of the normal resource space. > >But that's definitely overkill. I think Bjorn's fix is sufficient. > >-- >Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
