Hi,
It seems we need a little more discussion.
Please don't apply my patches >> Andrew, Greg
Russel, I'm sorry, but could you wait some hours for my reply?
I noticed the email from you when I was about to go to bed...
Thanks,
Kenji Kaneshige
Russell King wrote:
On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 12:12:34AM +0900, Kenji Kaneshige wrote:
Hi Andrew, Greg,
Here is an updated set of patches for PCI legacy I/O port free
driver. It incorporates all of the feedbacks. I rebased it against the
latest -mm kernel (2.6.16-rc5-mm1).
Could you consider applying this to -mm tree?
I've been wondering whether this "no_ioport" flag is the correct approach,
or whether it's adding to complexity when it isn't really required.
In the non-Intel world, the kernel itself sets up the PCI bus mappings,
and any IO bars which it can't satisfy might also need to be gracefully
handled. Currently, we just go 'printk("whoops, didn't allocate
resource")' and leave the BAR containing whatever random junk it
contained before, along with the resource containing whatever random
junk pci_bus_alloc_resource() decided to leave in it.
In such cases, I would suggest that the method of signalling that IO
should not be used is to have the IO resource structures cleared out -
if the IO resources aren't valid, they should not contain something
which could be interpreted as valid.
Maybe something like this should be done for the "legacy IO port" case
as well?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
