On Thu, 2007-12-13 at 14:05 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-12-13 at 14:00 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> .../...
>
> (oops, sent too fast)
>
> > So not only we can have a dangling BAR, but nothing prevent us to
> > actually go turn IO or MEM decoding on in case it wasn't already the
> > case on that device.
>
> And I was about to say before I clicked "send".. can't we do something like
> writing all ff's into the BAR at the same time as we clear res->start ? Isn't
> that supposed to pretty much disable decoding on that BAR ? Or not... Probably
> still better than leaving it to whatever dangling value it had no ?
Ok, reading some other threads, it seems that writing all ff's will not
be a very good alternative on x86 machines where MMCONFIG sits up
there...
I suppose there is nothing totally safe that can be done, thanks to
Intel not thinking about making BARs individually enable/disable'able
(or size-able without interrupting access, among other numerous fuckups
in the PCI spec).
So if a BAR is left dangling, I think we -must- disable MEM and IO
decoding on the whole device. In fact, the whole trick of passing a
bitmask of required BARs to pci_enable_device_bars() in the first place
doesn't fly.
Yuck.
Ben.
--
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]
