Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757636AbcDHGcJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2016 02:32:09 -0400 Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:46598 "EHLO gate.crashing.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755900AbcDHGcH (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2016 02:32:07 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 416 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Fri, 08 Apr 2016 02:32:07 EDT Message-ID: <1460096669.31740.19.camel@kernel.crashing.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 44/60] PCI: Add alt_size ressource allocation support From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Linus Torvalds , Yinghai Lu Cc: Bjorn Helgaas , David Miller , Wei Yang , TJ , Yijing Wang , Khalid Aziz , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2016 16:24:29 +1000 In-Reply-To: References: <1460074573-7481-1-git-send-email-yinghai@kernel.org> <1460074573-7481-45-git-send-email-yinghai@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.18.5.2 (3.18.5.2-1.fc23) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 591 Lines: 15 On Thu, 2016-04-07 at 17:56 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Maybe the kernel should just accept the smaller alignment. If the > minimum alignment we use is bigger than necessary, then we're just > wrong about it, and perhaps we should just use the smaller alignment > that the bios used. > > So instead of adding this notion of alternate alignment, maybe we > should just not be so uptight about our own minimum alignment > requirements? On the other hand it's nice to align things at page boundaries when these resources can possibly be mapped by user space or KVM guests... Cheers, Ben.