Never mind, for 2.6.34 your patch should be good enough. On 04/28/2010 09:07 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > Yinghai, ping, do you have any more information about this? > > On Tuesday 27 April 2010 09:11:10 am Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > >> On Monday 26 April 2010 07:41:55 pm Yinghai wrote: >> But let's double-check this: >> >> >>> also find one AMD system: >>> [ 7.056011] pci_root PNP0A03:00: host bridge window [mem 0xfed20000-0xffffffff] >>> ... >>> pci assign unassign code could use range like [mem 0xfed20000-0xffffffff] wrongly. >>> >> I agree, it's very unlikely that it's safe to put PCI devices all the >> way up to 0xffffffff. I suspect this might be fixed by d558b483d5a, >> which computes the end of the bridge window using _MAX rather than _LEN. >> >> See https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15480#c15 for an example >> similar to the one above: we originally thought the window was >> [mem 0xcff00000-0xffffffff], but d558b483d5a changes that to >> [mem 0xcff00000-0xfebfffff], which matches what Windows found. >> >> Yinghai, can you take a look at your AMD system again with a kernel that >> includes d558b483d5a, and see whether we still have a problem? If we >> *do* still have a problem, please open a bugzilla and attach a dmesg log >> with ACPI resource info collected with the debug patch here: >> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15533#c5 >> >> 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
