On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 09:43:29PM +0800, Yongji Xie wrote:
>The resource_alignment will releases memory
>resources allocated by firmware so that kernel
>can reassign new resources later on. But this
>will cause the problem that no resources can be
>allocated by kernel if PCI_PROBE_ONLY was set,
>e.g. on pSeries platform because PCI_PROBE_ONLY
>force kernel to use firmware setup and not to
>reassign any resources.
>
>To solve this problem, this patch ignores
>resource_alignment if PCI_PROBE_ONLY was set.
>
>Signed-off-by: Yongji Xie <xyjxie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>---
> drivers/pci/pci.c | 6 ++++++
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.c b/drivers/pci/pci.c
>index 602eb42..1db9267 100644
>--- a/drivers/pci/pci.c
>+++ b/drivers/pci/pci.c
>@@ -4607,6 +4607,12 @@ static resource_size_t pci_specified_resource_alignment(struct pci_dev *dev)
> spin_lock(&resource_alignment_lock);
> p = resource_alignment_param;
> while (*p) {
>+ if (pci_has_flag(PCI_PROBE_ONLY)) {
>+ printk(KERN_ERR "PCI: Ignore resource_alignment parameter: %s with"
>+ " PCI_PROBE_ONLY set\n", p);
>+ *p = 0;
>+ break;
It seems no "*p = 0" isn't required if I don't miss anything. If the check
on flag PCI_PROBE_ONLY is moved before the spin_lock(), it would save a bit
CPU cycles at least. Also, the logic looks more clear.
>+ }
> count = 0;
> if (sscanf(p, "%d%n", &align_order, &count) == 1 &&
> p[count] == '@') {
Thanks,
Gavin
>--
>1.7.9.5
>
--
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
