From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932239AbYDNSLm (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Apr 2008 14:11:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760119AbYDNSLe (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Apr 2008 14:11:34 -0400 Received: from rv-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.198.251]:59243 "EHLO rv-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760087AbYDNSLd (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Apr 2008 14:11:33 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=TGwpChyx/DwgA/9vGuCFGZAJCPIkl+ekr6jxDV/DfG72kLllIz2RoIAiz4BFkfgEXjTknxPJLWrc9pUc4OAbrK9w9zaBDSuBdBvjh8eAsbQEqVyQsN1Oxp0DLHP9scz0XeQ+sYthU1ifuEaKor5mv1s/V7y7OYNtORUGSZgu1iE= Message-ID: <86802c440804141111g7a0cad03rf0b46a9fff01fa95@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 11:11:32 -0700 From: "Yinghai Lu" To: "Arjan van de Ven" Subject: Re: [rfc] hw resource debugging checks Cc: "Andi Kleen" , "Ingo Molnar" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "Andrew Morton" , LKML , "Pavel Machek" , "Thomas Gleixner" , "H. Anvin" , "Greg Kroah-Hartman" In-Reply-To: <20080414071206.2a5ba029@laptopd505.fenrus.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200804102159.14563.rjw@sisk.pl> <200804112126.29455.rjw@sisk.pl> <20080413075845.GJ20332@elte.hu> <87d4ouw0u9.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <86802c440804131119m1c43497bg1864ce9751438e85@mail.gmail.com> <20080413182910.GB8641@one.firstfloor.org> <86802c440804131229q7d68091bpa18ac32d379f0ef9@mail.gmail.com> <20080413205215.6073a55b@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <86802c440804132201j69ab8776lb331d906726a005c@mail.gmail.com> <20080414071206.2a5ba029@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 7:12 AM, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 22:01:23 -0700 > > > "Yinghai Lu" wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 8:52 PM, Arjan van de Ven > > wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 12:29:30 -0700 > > > "Yinghai Lu" wrote: > > > > > > > On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 11:29 AM, Andi Kleen > > > > wrote: > > > > > > even I could talk to BIOS > > > > > > engineers everyday and tell them how to fix the problem in > > > > > > BIOS, some still can not be fixed because of the legacy > > > > > > BIOS framework or big mess. > > > > > > > > > > ... so you opt to create the big mess in the kernel. Great. > > > > > > > > > > And it does not even fixes a real problem, but getting > > > > > mmconfig or the numa bus discovery to work is not really a too > > > > > serious issue anyways. At best it is the icing on the cake to > > > > > enable some relatively obscure functionality and be a little > > > > > more efficient, but nothing really fundamental. > > > > > > > > > > But for those things just expecting a working modern BIOS is > > > > > quite reasonable. > > > > > > > > it does fix real problem. when big system with several HT links, > > > > and every link some pcie slots. > > > > you fully load pci-e cards (with pci bridge). BIOS will stop > > > > assign io/mmio resource to left device if it run out of io port > > > > range. (though it is supposed to go on to allocate mmio to left > > > > devices) ( modern pcie device only need mmio with drivers) > > > > > > > > With pre set range allocation in NB pci conf, kernel could > > > > allocate the resource in every peer root bus ranges. > > > > (the code for assign resource to device that is not assigned > > > > resource by BIOS --- already in kernel) > > > > > > > > > > there is a really big difference between assigning PCI device > > > resources and doing a whole thing like MMCFG from scratch. > > > > > that MCONF patchset for AMD fam10h include > > 1. get mmconfig from MSR, MCFG is using that too, if that is right, > > and we will get MCONF support when acpi support is off, and MCFG is > > broken. > > 2. or assign 0xfc00000000 to that MSR, that is safe too. > > using MCONF when the ACPI support isn't there is just a deathtrap. > To be honest, if you want to break the AMD machines out there, who am > I to care about that, I work for Intel. But I'm worried someone thinks > this can be done for Intel based systems too, and then carry over all > the bad bugs to those as well ;( I don't want to break any machine. and just want to workaround some bios bug, and use MMCONF when acpi is disabled... YH