> patch did, though, it was that way already before. But otoh with the
> legacy flag set in progif, these BARs *should* be I/O ones...
They *are* I/O resources. The register value loaded by the BIOS or
hardware at start up is undefined and the "is memory" check is actually
wrong.
Doesn't explain
patch did, though, it was that way already before. But otoh with the
legacy flag set in progif, these BARs *should* be I/O ones...
They *are* I/O resources. The register value loaded by the BIOS or
hardware at start up is undefined and the is memory check is actually
wrong.
Doesn't explain the
>>> Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 25.03.07 18:11 >>>
>On Sun, Mar 25, 2007 at 08:23:23AM -0700, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
>> I just upgraded from 2.6.20.2 to 2.6.20.4 on my Compaq V6000 laptop,
>> which has an NVidia core chipset. It has the MCP51 and uses it for PATA
>> and SATA.
>>
>> Booting the
On Sun, Mar 25, 2007 at 07:25:46PM -0700, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > It also adds PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_SPACE_IO to the flags which it didn't
> > without the patch.
>
> As an experiment I modified 2.6.20.4 to _only_ remove that value from
> the combined value for the flags and
Adrian Bunk wrote:
> It also adds PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_SPACE_IO to the flags which it didn't
> without the patch.
As an experiment I modified 2.6.20.4 to _only_ remove that value from
the combined value for the flags and it did not help in any noticeable
way. I can reliably boot and operate the
On Sun, Mar 25, 2007 at 09:08:46PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Jan, any thoughts about this?
> > Should this be backed out of the -stable releases?
>
> All the code does if it prints that message.. is print that message.
>...
It also adds PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_SPACE_IO to the flags which it didn't
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 19:13:50 +0100, Torsten Kaiser wrote
> On 3/25/07, Gabriel C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> > > I just upgraded from 2.6.20.2 to 2.6.20.4 on my Compaq V6000 laptop,
> > > which has an NVidia core chipset. It has the MCP51 and uses it for PATA
> > > and
> Jan, any thoughts about this?
> Should this be backed out of the -stable releases?
All the code does if it prints that message.. is print that message.
The fact the message appears at all appears to indicate a slightly odd
BIOS but since the values in those registers are undefined in this mode
On 3/25/07, Gabriel C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> I just upgraded from 2.6.20.2 to 2.6.20.4 on my Compaq V6000 laptop,
> which has an NVidia core chipset. It has the MCP51 and uses it for PATA
> and SATA.
>
> Booting the 2.6.20.4 kernel causes two messages (and a kernel
Greg KH wrote:
> Kevin, does 2.6.21-rc4 work properly for you?
No, it seems to exhibit the same behavior. However, I should note that
this laptop is not 100% stable under any kernel release anyway... in
text console mode it frequently locks up tight (although not with the
NVidia closed-source
Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
I just upgraded from 2.6.20.2 to 2.6.20.4 on my Compaq V6000 laptop,
which has an NVidia core chipset. It has the MCP51 and uses it for PATA
and SATA.
Booting the 2.6.20.4 kernel causes two messages (and a kernel lockup)
like this:
:00:0d.0: cannot adjust BAR0 (not
On Sun, Mar 25, 2007 at 08:23:23AM -0700, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> I just upgraded from 2.6.20.2 to 2.6.20.4 on my Compaq V6000 laptop,
> which has an NVidia core chipset. It has the MCP51 and uses it for PATA
> and SATA.
>
> Booting the 2.6.20.4 kernel causes two messages (and a kernel lockup)
I just upgraded from 2.6.20.2 to 2.6.20.4 on my Compaq V6000 laptop,
which has an NVidia core chipset. It has the MCP51 and uses it for PATA
and SATA.
Booting the 2.6.20.4 kernel causes two messages (and a kernel lockup)
like this:
:00:0d.0: cannot adjust BAR0 (not I/O)
:00:0d.0: cannot
I just upgraded from 2.6.20.2 to 2.6.20.4 on my Compaq V6000 laptop,
which has an NVidia core chipset. It has the MCP51 and uses it for PATA
and SATA.
Booting the 2.6.20.4 kernel causes two messages (and a kernel lockup)
like this:
:00:0d.0: cannot adjust BAR0 (not I/O)
:00:0d.0: cannot
On Sun, Mar 25, 2007 at 08:23:23AM -0700, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
I just upgraded from 2.6.20.2 to 2.6.20.4 on my Compaq V6000 laptop,
which has an NVidia core chipset. It has the MCP51 and uses it for PATA
and SATA.
Booting the 2.6.20.4 kernel causes two messages (and a kernel lockup)
like
Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
I just upgraded from 2.6.20.2 to 2.6.20.4 on my Compaq V6000 laptop,
which has an NVidia core chipset. It has the MCP51 and uses it for PATA
and SATA.
Booting the 2.6.20.4 kernel causes two messages (and a kernel lockup)
like this:
:00:0d.0: cannot adjust BAR0 (not
Greg KH wrote:
Kevin, does 2.6.21-rc4 work properly for you?
No, it seems to exhibit the same behavior. However, I should note that
this laptop is not 100% stable under any kernel release anyway... in
text console mode it frequently locks up tight (although not with the
NVidia closed-source
On 3/25/07, Gabriel C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
I just upgraded from 2.6.20.2 to 2.6.20.4 on my Compaq V6000 laptop,
which has an NVidia core chipset. It has the MCP51 and uses it for PATA
and SATA.
Booting the 2.6.20.4 kernel causes two messages (and a kernel lockup)
Jan, any thoughts about this?
Should this be backed out of the -stable releases?
All the code does if it prints that message.. is print that message.
The fact the message appears at all appears to indicate a slightly odd
BIOS but since the values in those registers are undefined in this mode
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 19:13:50 +0100, Torsten Kaiser wrote
On 3/25/07, Gabriel C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
I just upgraded from 2.6.20.2 to 2.6.20.4 on my Compaq V6000 laptop,
which has an NVidia core chipset. It has the MCP51 and uses it for PATA
and SATA.
On Sun, Mar 25, 2007 at 09:08:46PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
Jan, any thoughts about this?
Should this be backed out of the -stable releases?
All the code does if it prints that message.. is print that message.
...
It also adds PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_SPACE_IO to the flags which it didn't
without
Adrian Bunk wrote:
It also adds PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_SPACE_IO to the flags which it didn't
without the patch.
As an experiment I modified 2.6.20.4 to _only_ remove that value from
the combined value for the flags and it did not help in any noticeable
way. I can reliably boot and operate the
On Sun, Mar 25, 2007 at 07:25:46PM -0700, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
Adrian Bunk wrote:
It also adds PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_SPACE_IO to the flags which it didn't
without the patch.
As an experiment I modified 2.6.20.4 to _only_ remove that value from
the combined value for the flags and it did
Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] 25.03.07 18:11
On Sun, Mar 25, 2007 at 08:23:23AM -0700, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
I just upgraded from 2.6.20.2 to 2.6.20.4 on my Compaq V6000 laptop,
which has an NVidia core chipset. It has the MCP51 and uses it for PATA
and SATA.
Booting the 2.6.20.4 kernel
24 matches
Mail list logo
