On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 02:47:55PM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> So at first, an unassigned resource has the IORESOURCE_UNSET flag set
> (or is supposed to). pci_assign_resource() itself will clear that flag
> if it succeeds.
>
> However, pretty much nothing else checks that flag, so it's mostly
> useful.
I doubt of the generic usefulness of that flag, as it would be mere
equivalent of resource->parent == NULL.
I think the IORESOURCE_UNSET flag came from PnP and PCI subsystem has
never used it.
> Now, we have drivers/pci/setup-bus.c doing:
>
> if (pci_assign_resource(list->dev, idx)) {
> res->start = 0;
> res->end = 0;
> res->flags = 0;
> }
>
> So it basically destroys the resource content utterly when
> pci_assign_resource() fails...
Yes, it's ugly. But, IIRC, this was the only way to prevent some drivers
and arch code from using an unassigned resource...
> There are questions raised here:
>
> - Shouldn't we instead fix things so that instead, we properly
> test for IORESOURCE_UNSET in pci_request_* & friends and just have
> pci_assign_resource() continue as it's doing now, that is not clear that
> flag if the assignment fails ?
>
> - setup-bus.c is a bit violent: As soon as it hits a p2p bridge, it
> will bluntly re-assign everybody, not trying to check wether a resource
> was already correctly assigned by the firmware or not. However, it never
No - it checks the resource->parent and doesn't touch the resources which
are already assigned.
> sets IORESOURCE_UNSET. Thus if we do the above, we should probably have
> it always set that bit before calling pci_assign_resource()...
>
> Now the question is, what should I do in pci_32.c ... right now, we
> unconditionally clear IORESOURCE_UNSET, which isn't very correct, then
> call pci_assign_resource().
>
> Should I do like the setup-bus.c and just completely wipe the resource
> if pci_assign_resource() fail ? Or should I just stop clearing
> IORESOURCE_UNSET (and thus rely on pci_assign_resource() to clear it
> only if it succeeds, which seems to work) in which case I see no point
> in making that function much check since there is nothing useful to do
> when it fails and it does printk already.
Well, as IORESOURCE_UNSET usage seems to be an exclusive PPC32 thing,
there is no much difference. ;-)
Though I agree that ignoring the return value of pci_assign_resource()
is entirely valid in most cases.
Ivan.
-
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]
