On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 02:19:24PM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 11:58:50AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >[+cc Yinghai]
> >
> >On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 3:31 AM, Wei Yang <weiyang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> In commit 462d9303 ("PCI: Align P2P windows using pcibios_window_alignment()"),
> >> it introduce a new method to calculate the window alignment of P2P bridge.
> >>
> >> When the io_window_1k is set, the calculation for the io resource alignment
> >> is different from the original one. In the original logic before 462d9303,
> >> the alignment is no bigger than 4K even the io_window_1k is set. The logic
> >> introduced in 462d9303 will limit the alignment to 1k in this case.
> >>
> >> This patch fix this issue.
> >
> >Presumably this fixes a bug, but you don't say what it is. "different
> >from the original" is not a description of a problem. You need
> >something like "with the current code, we allocate the wrong window
> >size in situation X, or we allocate a window with incorrect alignment
> >in situation Y, etc."
> >
>
> With current code, we allocate the wrong window size when upstream bridge
> could be 1k aligned and one of the downstream port is 4k aligned.
>
> In this case, the "min_align" should be 4k. But the current code set
> "min_align" to 1k.
I would expect that we allocate a window with incorrect *alignment*,
not incorrect size. If you include a dmesg log and lspci output and point
out the problem, that will avoid a lot of confusion.
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
