From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, yannick.roehlly@free.fr
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/pci: make pci_mem_start to be aligned only -v4
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 15:16:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090417131633.GA30578@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0904161716270.4042@localhost.localdomain>
* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > Could we perhaps round up to 1MB in this case too?
>
> (The below 1MB one).
>
> I'd argue against it, at least in this incarnation. I can well
> imagine somebody wanting to do resource management in the 640k-1M
> window, so..
ok - indeed - if there's some super-small system with limited
address lines and all physical addresses tightly packed with RAM?
> > Would it make sense to round up everything that is listed in the
> > E820 map? Just in case the BIOS is not entirely honest about the
> > true extent of that area.
>
> Well, it would probably work, but on the other hand, when we see
> "E820_RAM", that means that we really _can_ trust that that E820
> entry is right, since we're going to use it as RAM (and Windows
> would too), and if it wasn't RAM, really bad things would happen.
>
> So E820_RAM is a _lot_ more trustworthy than the other cases. If
> we're rounding up by reasonably large amounts like 32MB or even
> more, I really think we should do so for the things we really know
> are there, and that we really fundamentally know come in big
> granularities.
>
> The other entries in the e820 map can reasonably be 4kB or
> something, because they are an IO-APIC or whatever. I can't say
> that I'd feel happy putting a guard area around something like
> that. But RAM? Sure, it can come in 384kB chunks (think RAM
> remapping for the low 1MB area), but it doesn't tend to happen
> when we're talking gigs any more.
One of my systems is a bit weird, with such a checkered RAM map:
BIOS-provided physical RAM map:
BIOS-e820: 0000000000000000 - 000000000009fc00 (usable) 0.639 MB RAM
BIOS-e820: 000000000009fc00 - 00000000000a0000 (reserved) 0.001 MB
[ hole ] 0.250 MB
BIOS-e820: 00000000000e0000 - 0000000000100000 (reserved) 0.125 MB
BIOS-e820: 0000000000100000 - 000000003ed94000 (usable) 1004.5 MB RAM
BIOS-e820: 000000003ed94000 - 000000003ee4e000 (ACPI NVS) 0.7 MB
BIOS-e820: 000000003ee4e000 - 000000003fea2000 (usable) 16.3 MB RAM
BIOS-e820: 000000003fea2000 - 000000003fee9000 (ACPI NVS) 0.3 MB
BIOS-e820: 000000003fee9000 - 000000003feed000 (usable) 0.15 MB RAM
BIOS-e820: 000000003feed000 - 000000003feff000 (ACPI data 0.07 MB
BIOS-e820: 000000003feff000 - 000000003ff00000 (usable) 0.004 MB RAM
[ hole ] 1.0 MB
[ hole ] 3072.0 MB
On this map, using your scheme, we'd fill up that small 1MB hole up
to 1GB [mockup]:
BIOS-e820: 000000003ff00000 - 0000000040000000 (RAM buffer)
I guess that's a good thing not just for robustness: a chipset might
be faster when DMA or mmio is on some well-isolated physical memory
range, not too close to real RAM or other devices?
Bits of the low hole:
00000000-0009fbff : System RAM
0009fc00-0009ffff : reserved
000c0000-000dffff : pnp 00:01
000e0000-000fffff : reserved
00100000-3ed93fff : System RAM
would still be available to dynamic PCI resources - as the 64K
rounding would leave it alone.
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-17 13:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 117+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <bug-11103-13546@http.bugzilla.kernel.org/>
[not found] ` <200904101913.n3AJDhMm018684@demeter.kernel.org>
2009-04-10 20:27 ` [Bug 11103] Can't use framebuffer or vesa Xorg with two memory modules Yinghai Lu
2009-04-11 3:29 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-14 20:49 ` [PATCH] pci: don't assume pref memio are 64bit -v2 Yinghai Lu
2009-04-14 20:50 ` [PATCH] x86/pci: make pci_mem_start to be aligned only Yinghai Lu
2009-04-14 21:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-14 21:27 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-14 21:27 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-14 22:35 ` Yannick Roehlly
2009-04-15 0:29 ` [PATCH] x86/pci: make pci_mem_start to be aligned only -v2 Yinghai Lu
2009-04-15 0:41 ` [PATCH] x86/pci: make pci_mem_start to be aligned only -v3 Yinghai Lu
2009-04-15 0:42 ` [PATCH] x86/pci: fix -1 calling to e820_all_mapped with mmconfig Yinghai Lu
2009-04-16 16:31 ` [PATCH] x86/pci: make pci_mem_start to be aligned only -v3 Jesse Barnes
2009-04-16 16:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-16 16:56 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-16 17:18 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-16 17:27 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-16 17:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-16 17:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-16 20:13 ` [PATCH] x86/pci: make pci_mem_start to be aligned only -v4 Yinghai Lu
2009-04-16 23:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-16 23:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-17 0:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-17 13:16 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2009-04-17 21:59 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-17 22:04 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-18 5:37 ` [PATCH] pci: keep pci device resource name pointer right Yinghai Lu
2009-04-18 7:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-18 16:05 ` Jesse Barnes
2009-04-18 18:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-18 19:19 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-18 19:23 ` Greg KH
2009-04-18 20:00 ` Kay Sievers
2009-04-18 20:27 ` Kay Sievers
2009-04-18 20:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-18 22:05 ` [PATCH] driver: dont update dev_name via device_add path Yinghai Lu
2009-04-28 7:36 ` [PATCH] driver: make dev_set_name(, NULL) work Yinghai Lu
2009-04-28 7:42 ` [RFC PATCH] use dev_set_name(,NULL) to prevent leaking Yinghai Lu
2009-04-28 8:25 ` Kay Sievers
2009-04-28 15:21 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-28 15:34 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-28 15:39 ` Greg KH
2009-04-28 15:51 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-28 15:56 ` Kay Sievers
2009-04-28 16:08 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-28 16:15 ` Kay Sievers
2009-04-28 19:04 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-28 16:36 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-28 16:50 ` Kay Sievers
2009-04-28 14:52 ` Greg KH
2009-04-28 14:51 ` [PATCH] driver: make dev_set_name(, NULL) work Greg KH
2009-04-28 15:14 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-28 15:39 ` Greg KH
2009-04-18 21:07 ` [PATCH] pci: keep pci device resource name pointer right Yinghai Lu
2009-04-18 22:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-18 20:00 ` [PATCH] driver: dont update dev_name if it is not changed Yinghai Lu
2009-04-18 20:11 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-18 20:20 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-18 20:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-18 8:33 ` [PATCH] x86/pci: make pci_mem_start to be aligned only -v4 Yinghai Lu
2009-04-18 9:22 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-18 17:07 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-18 18:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-18 19:14 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-18 19:26 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-18 22:20 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-18 22:31 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-18 20:13 ` Ivan Kokshaysky
2009-04-18 18:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-18 22:44 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-18 23:01 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-18 23:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-18 23:26 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-18 23:30 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-18 23:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-19 0:32 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-04-19 4:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-19 5:26 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-19 19:35 ` Yannick Roehlly
2009-04-19 19:59 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-19 20:24 ` Yannick Roehlly
2009-04-19 9:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-19 9:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-19 17:52 ` Jesse Barnes
2009-04-20 22:33 ` Ivan Kokshaysky
2009-04-20 22:52 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-21 10:54 ` Ivan Kokshaysky
2009-04-21 0:09 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-21 10:56 ` Ivan Kokshaysky
2009-04-21 15:57 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-22 22:37 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] pci: don't assume pref memio are 64bit -v3 Yinghai Lu
2009-04-22 22:38 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] pci: try to assign res for device under transparent bridges Yinghai Lu
2009-04-22 22:49 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] pci: don't assume pref memio are 64bit -v3 Jesse Barnes
2009-04-23 0:49 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-23 1:05 ` Jesse Barnes
2009-04-23 2:03 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-23 12:58 ` Ivan Kokshaysky
2009-04-23 15:30 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-23 2:10 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-23 13:22 ` Ivan Kokshaysky
2009-04-23 15:13 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-23 22:19 ` Ivan Kokshaysky
2009-04-24 3:48 ` [PATCH 1/4] pci/x86: don't assume pref memio are 64bit -v4 Yinghai Lu
2009-04-24 3:49 ` [PATCH 2/4] pci: try to assign res for device under transparent bridges -v2 Yinghai Lu
2009-04-24 3:50 ` [PATCH 3/4] x86: reserve range near the ram Yinghai Lu
2009-04-24 3:50 ` [PATCH 4/4] x86/pci: make pci_mem_start to be aligned only -v5 Yinghai Lu
2009-04-24 13:16 ` [PATCH 1/4] pci/x86: don't assume pref memio are 64bit -v4 Ivan Kokshaysky
2009-05-05 18:52 ` Jesse Barnes
2009-05-06 12:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-06 15:06 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86: reserve range near the ram Yinghai Lu
2009-05-11 9:51 ` [tip:x86/mm] x86, e820, pci: reserve extra free space near end of RAM tip-bot for Linus Torvalds
2009-05-06 15:07 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86/pci: make pci_mem_start to be aligned only -v5 Yinghai Lu
2009-05-11 9:51 ` [tip:x86/mm] x86/pci: remove rounding quirk from e820_setup_gap() tip-bot for Yinghai Lu
2009-04-23 12:36 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] pci: don't assume pref memio are 64bit -v3 Ivan Kokshaysky
2009-04-23 12:41 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-23 13:09 ` Ivan Kokshaysky
2009-04-23 15:05 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-04-21 15:41 ` [PATCH] x86/pci: make pci_mem_start to be aligned only -v4 Jesse Barnes
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090417131633.GA30578@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=yannick.roehlly@free.fr \
--cc=yinghai@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome