Message-ID: <442414E0.4050806@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 16:48:48 +0100
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Windows/20051201)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
CC: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] Ignore MCFG if the mmconfig area isn't reserved in thee820
 table
References: <1143138170.3147.43.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20060324072250.A13756@unix-os.sc.intel.com> <44240F30.10801@linux.intel.com> <200603241639.54192.ak@suse.de> <44241359.3070409@linux.intel.com> <20060324074808.A14035@unix-os.sc.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <20060324074808.A14035@unix-os.sc.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1172
Lines: 25

Ashok Raj wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 04:42:17PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>> Andi Kleen wrote:
>>> In theory they should be the same. What do you think is different?
>> in practice the x86-64 version returns "success" if there is one byte in the entire
>> memory range that complies with the requested type, even if the rest of the range is
>> of another type. What the ideal is for the purpose here is "is the entire range reserved",
>> but for now I'll settle for "is the start address reserved".
>>
>> (and yes you can express the "is the start address reserved" as a question to the current function for
>> a 1 byte range, I probably should do that I suppose)
> 
> or why not check
> 
> if (type == ei->type && start >= ei->addr && end <= (ei->addr + ei->size))
> 	return 1;
> 
> will this make the range check check stricter?

that's not going to cut it; you can have 2 e820 entries that together span the range
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/