From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Ansuel Smith <ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
Cc: Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
Abbott Liu <liuwenliang@huawei.com>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@google.com>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm: Enlarge IO_SPACE_LIMIT needed for some SoC
Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 03:24:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YJnq3Y3/I1kdV1Ov@casper.infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210511021656.17719-1-ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 04:16:54AM +0200, Ansuel Smith wrote:
> Ipq8064 SoC requires larger IO_SPACE_LIMIT on second and third pci port.
Do you really? I mean, yes, theoretically, I understand it, the
hardware supports 64kB of I/O port space per root port. But I/O
port space is rather deprecated these days. My laptop has precisely
two devices with I/O ports, one with 64 bytes and the other with 32
bytes. Would you really suffer by allocating 16kB of I/O port
space to each root port?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-11 2:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-11 2:16 [PATCH] arm: Enlarge IO_SPACE_LIMIT needed for some SoC Ansuel Smith
2021-05-11 2:24 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2021-05-11 2:32 ` Ansuel Smith
2021-05-11 4:26 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-05-11 12:15 ` Ansuel Smith
2021-05-11 12:30 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-05-11 12:37 ` Ansuel Smith
2021-05-11 12:46 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-05-11 12:51 ` Ansuel Smith
2021-05-11 14:55 ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2021-05-11 14:54 ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2021-05-17 10:26 ` Linus Walleij
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=YJnq3Y3/I1kdV1Ov@casper.infradead.org \
--to=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=ansuelsmth@gmail.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=liuwenliang@huawei.com \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=palmerdabbelt@google.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).