Re: [PATCH] x86, HPET: ignore any PCI BARs that match an HPET we already know about

[Bjorn Helgaas]

On Wednesday, September 22, 2010 04:10:36 pm H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 09/22/2010 02:52 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > 
> > We don't necessarily need to slavishly copy what Windows does, but
> > I'd feel better if we understood how it avoided the problem on the
> > Gigabyte board so we could make a more informed decision.
> > 
> > It really doesn't look like Windows, and therefore BIOS writers,
> > share your expectations about PCI BARs in E820 reserved areas.
> > It's likely still *safe* to make them fixed resources, but we might
> > be able to fix more issues if we knew how Windows avoids the problem.
> > 
> 
> Keep in mind that Windows -- the version they tested against -- might
> just work by accident.  That's a "ship it" condition for the BIOS for
> almost every vendor.

Yep.  I really wish I had a board to play with to find out.  I'm sure
we'd learn something useful.

> Also, do note that the reservations don't necessarily need to come from
> the BIOS; we can mark the HPET area internally reserved, for example,
> when we discover it.

That actually raises another question I had: we currently look at the
HPET table pretty early, but I don't know whether the earliness is a
requirement.  It would be cleaner if we could ignore the table and
discover the HPET later in normal ways like pnp_register_driver() and
pci_register_driver().  Then I could imagine someday dealing with the
resources in a more generic way, i.e., in the PCI and PNP cores.

Bjorn
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/