From: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
To: "Sean O. Stalley" <sean.stalley@intel.com>
Cc: "Yinghai Lu" <yinghai@kernel.org>,
"Rajat Jain" <rajatxjain@gmail.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
"Rafał Miłecki" <zajec5@gmail.com>,
"gong.chen@linux.intel.com" <gong.chen@linux.intel.com>,
"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-api@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] PCI: Add support for Enhanced Allocation devices
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2015 14:25:50 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAErSpo4qZ9AXskyo86gXG1cb3AqCn-HB05nj7qT9wovZdLt2Tg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150902174612.GA2700@sean.stalley.intel.com>
On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 12:46 PM, Sean O. Stalley <sean.stalley@intel.com> wrote:
> Would it be better to modify pci_claim_resource() to support EA instead of adding pci_ea_claim_resource()?
> That way, EA entries would be claimed at the same time as traditional BARs.
Yes, I think so.
Why wouldn't pci_claim_resource() work as-is for EA? I see that
pci_ea_get_parent_resource() defaults to iomem_resource or
ioport_resource if we don't find a parent, but I don't understand why
that's necessary.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
To: "Sean O. Stalley" <sean.stalley-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: "Yinghai Lu" <yinghai-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
"Rajat Jain" <rajatxjain-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin"
<mst-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
"Rafał Miłecki" <zajec5-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
"gong.chen-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org"
<gong.chen-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org>,
"linux-pci-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org"
<linux-pci-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List"
<linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] PCI: Add support for Enhanced Allocation devices
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2015 14:25:50 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAErSpo4qZ9AXskyo86gXG1cb3AqCn-HB05nj7qT9wovZdLt2Tg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150902174612.GA2700-KQ5zpJUXklQTH34CoL1+91DQ4js95KgL@public.gmane.org>
On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 12:46 PM, Sean O. Stalley <sean.stalley-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Would it be better to modify pci_claim_resource() to support EA instead of adding pci_ea_claim_resource()?
> That way, EA entries would be claimed at the same time as traditional BARs.
Yes, I think so.
Why wouldn't pci_claim_resource() work as-is for EA? I see that
pci_ea_get_parent_resource() defaults to iomem_resource or
ioport_resource if we don't find a parent, but I don't understand why
that's necessary.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-02 19:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-20 16:59 [PATCH 0/2] PCI: Add support for PCI Enhanced Allocation "BARs" Sean O. Stalley
2015-08-20 16:59 ` Sean O. Stalley
2015-08-20 16:59 ` [PATCH 1/2] PCI: Add Enhanced Allocation register entries Sean O. Stalley
2015-08-20 16:59 ` [PATCH 2/2] PCI: Add support for Enhanced Allocation devices Sean O. Stalley
2015-08-20 16:59 ` Sean O. Stalley
2015-09-01 23:14 ` Yinghai Lu
2015-09-02 17:46 ` Sean O. Stalley
2015-09-02 17:46 ` Sean O. Stalley
2015-09-02 19:25 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2015-09-02 19:25 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-09-02 20:01 ` Sean O. Stalley
2015-09-02 21:21 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-09-02 21:21 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-09-03 0:29 ` Sean O. Stalley
2015-09-03 0:29 ` Sean O. Stalley
2015-09-03 14:46 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-09-03 18:23 ` Sean O. Stalley
2015-09-03 18:23 ` Sean O. Stalley
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=CAErSpo4qZ9AXskyo86gXG1cb3AqCn-HB05nj7qT9wovZdLt2Tg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=gong.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=rajatxjain@gmail.com \
--cc=sean.stalley@intel.com \
--cc=yinghai@kernel.org \
--cc=zajec5@gmail.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.