Re: [PATCH] x86: Avoid using hardcoded number of variable range MTRRs in mtrr_commit()

On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 12:05 AM Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Bin, > > On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 at 01:05, Bin Meng wrote: > > > > Since commit 29d2d64ed55f ("x86: Add support for more than 8 MTRRs"), > > the maximum number of variable range MTRRs was increased from 8 to 10, > > which caused a #GP exceptio

Re: [PATCH] x86: Avoid using hardcoded number of variable range MTRRs in mtrr_commit()

Hi Simon, On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 12:05 AM Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Bin, > > On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 at 01:05, Bin Meng wrote: > > > > Since commit 29d2d64ed55f ("x86: Add support for more than 8 MTRRs"), > > the maximum number of variable range MTRRs was increased from 8 to 10, > > which caused a #

Re: [PATCH] x86: Avoid using hardcoded number of variable range MTRRs in mtrr_commit()

Hi Bin, On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 at 01:05, Bin Meng wrote: > > Since commit 29d2d64ed55f ("x86: Add support for more than 8 MTRRs"), > the maximum number of variable range MTRRs was increased from 8 to 10, > which caused a #GP exception during VESA video driver probe. > > On the BayTrail platform there

[PATCH] x86: Avoid using hardcoded number of variable range MTRRs in mtrr_commit()

Since commit 29d2d64ed55f ("x86: Add support for more than 8 MTRRs"), the maximum number of variable range MTRRs was increased from 8 to 10, which caused a #GP exception during VESA video driver probe. On the BayTrail platform there are only 8 variable range MTRRs. In mtrr_commit() it still uses M