On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 10:07:49AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote: > On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 11:09:19 -0600 > Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Some BIOSes provide PCI host bridge windows that overlap, e.g., > > > > pci_root PNP0A03:00: host bridge window [mem 0xb0000000-0xffffffff] > > pci_root PNP0A03:00: host bridge window [mem 0xafffffff-0xdfffffff] > > pci_root PNP0A03:00: host bridge window [mem 0xf0000000-0xffffffff] > > > > If we simply insert these as children of iomem_resource, the second window > > fails because it conflicts with the first, and the third is inserted as a > > child of the first, i.e., > > > > b0000000-ffffffff PCI Bus 0000:00 > > f0000000-ffffffff PCI Bus 0000:00 > > > > When we claim PCI device resources, this can cause collisions like this > > if we put them in the first window: > > > > pci 0000:00:01.0: address space collision: [mem 0xff300000-0xff4fffff] conflicts with PCI Bus 0000:00 [mem 0xf0000000-0xffffffff] > > > > Host bridge windows are top-level resources by definition, so it doesn't > > make sense to make the third window a child of the first. This patch > > coalesces any host bridge windows that overlap. For the example above, > > the result is this single window: > > > > pci_root PNP0A03:00: host bridge window [mem 0xafffffff-0xffffffff] > > > > This fixes a 2.6.34 regression. > > Also applied, same comment as before applies here. Huh, did this get dropped somewhere along the way? I don't see it in rc1. 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
