On Thursday 31 January 2008 05:50:13 pm Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Robert Hancock wrote: > > > > I think so. There was one objection that it introduced a dependency on > > pnpacpi > > loading after PCI bus enumeration, though. > > > > Linus also suggested that pnpacpi could be marking the resources as "present > > but unused" so that drivers can request those regions but we still prevent > > dynamically assigning resources into them. > > I _think_ that's what ACPI used to do before switching over to the PnPACPI > thing, so I do think that "present but not reserved" approach is not just > the right one, but also the (historically) tested one.
The reservation happens in drivers/pnp/system.c, and it does mark the region as "not busy." I think the problem here is that the PCI BAR is bigger and spans the region reported by ACPI: [ 22.906654] system 00:08: iomem range 0xfebfa000-0xfebfac00 has been reserved [ 31.133141] PCI: Unable to reserve mem region #1:[EMAIL PROTECTED] for device 0000:00:1b.0 We can easily add more BIOSes to the PNP quirk. I really don't want to use the earlier quirk that scanned PCI devices from a PNP quirk. I think that's just wrong because PNP (which conceptually includes ACPI) is what tells us about PCI root bridges. Bjorn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
