On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 04:01:45PM +0100, Guenter Roeck wrote: > Hi Lorenzo, > > On 07/07/2015 07:40 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 05:24:13PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > >> Hi Guenter, > >> > >> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 07:01:03PM +0100, Guenter Roeck wrote: > >>> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 07:41:12AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > >>>> > >>>>>> I'd like res->flags to reflect the capabilities of the hardware, not > >>>>>> whether the window is currently enabled. > >>>>>> > >>>>> Flag bits seem to be all taken. Could we use IORESOURCE_DISABLED for that > >>>>> purpose, or could that cause conflicts elsewhere ? > >>>> > >>>> Yes, I think IORESOURCE_DISABLED would be appropriate for any I/O windows > >>>> below a host bridge that doesn't support I/O space. > >>>> > >>> I integrated Lorenzo's patch and tried to get this working. > >> > >> Thanks. How do you want to proceed with this ? Are you taking my patch > >> and post it along with your updated series ? We need to extend test > >> coverage to platforms we could not test on, as you know my series > >> affects all archs but SPARC (I mean it should *not* affect them, this > >> has to be tested though, I do not have the HW needed, your coverage > >> for x86 and PowerPC is great but I do not think it can be deemed > >> sufficient). > >> > >> Please let me know, thanks ! > > > > Any comment on this ? I will have to remove the bridge resource claiming > > from my patch according to Ben's concerns for PowerPC, which requires > > a v3. > > > > How do you want me to go on with this ? > > > > Can you send your v3 ? Yes, I have to figure out though where I can claim bridge resources on PROBE_ONLY arm/arm64 systems, which is proving interesting, anyway I will send it out asap. > I didn't submit my latest version because I recalled Ben's objections, > and I never got around asking you if you plan to send a new version > of your patch. No worries, let's get this sorted. > I had to drop the idea of using IORESOURCE_DISABLED; pretty much all > kernel code uses the "!flags" test to identify unused resources. > I tried to change that, but just could not get it to work. > I ended up introducing a new bus flag instead, PCI_BUS_FLAGS_NO_IO, > which works quite nicely since it propagates to child buses. Ok, great, I can test it too. Thanks, Lorenzo -- 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
