Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933234AbZLOSDV (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:03:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933135AbZLOSDK (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:03:10 -0500 Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:50853 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933119AbZLOSDI (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:03:08 -0500 Message-ID: <4B27CEF8.9010303@kernel.org> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 10:01:28 -0800 From: Yinghai Lu User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bjorn Helgaas CC: Robert Hancock , Tvrtko Ursulin , Tvrtko Ursulin , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Jesse Barnes Subject: Re: Are these MTRR settings correct? References: <200912130807.44905.tvrtko@ursulin.net> <4B26E4C7.8040100@gmail.com> <4B26E973.6080305@kernel.org> <200912150955.03974.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com> In-Reply-To: <200912150955.03974.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2147 Lines: 50 Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Monday 14 December 2009 06:42:11 pm Yinghai Lu wrote: >> Robert Hancock wrote: >>> Something else isn't quite right. It looks like MMCONFIG area should be >>> reserved: >>> >>> [ 0.308434] system 00:0c: iomem range 0xe0000000-0xefffffff has been >>> reserved >>> >>> but the code didn't seem to detect that. In fact there doesn't seem to >>> be any output about whether it was or wasn't reserved, which from the >>> code it seems there should be. >>> >>> Maybe because of that ACPI method execution error? >> could be sth pnpacpi brokenness? > > Robert, I assume you're referring to this from Tvrtko's post > (http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/12/13/90): > > [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: 00000000dffd0000 - 00000000e0000000 (reserved) > [ 0.000000] BIOS-e820: 00000000ff700000 - 0000000100000000 (reserved) > ... > [ 0.250088] PCI: Found AMD Family 10h NB with MMCONFIG support. > [ 0.250091] PCI: MCFG configuration 0: base e0000000 segment 0 buses 0 - 255 > [ 0.250092] PCI: Not using MMCONFIG. > ... > [ 0.253491] ACPI Error (psargs-0359): [ECEN] Namespace lookup failure, AE_NOT_FOUND > [ 0.253495] ACPI Error (psparse-0537): Method parse/execution failed [\] (Node ffffffff81656ab0), AE_NOT_FOUND > ... > [ 0.308434] system 00:0c: iomem range 0xe0000000-0xefffffff has been reserved > > I think we're rejecting MMCONFIG in the early call to > pci_mmcfg_reject_broken(), when we check only E820 resources, not > ACPI resources. And indeed, the 0xe0000000-0xefffffff range is > not mentioned in E820. Which output did you expect to see? > > I am uncomfortable with this early/late checking and looking at both > E820 and ACPI. It just feels hacky and error-prone. I'm not happy about > adding Yinghai's special-case "if we found AMD Fam10h, don't check for > reservations" patch either. only check ACPI or remove all hostbridge detect related? YH -- 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/