> -----Original Message----- > From: ron minnich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 3:29 PM > To: Myles Watson > Cc: Coreboot > Subject: Re: Extra pairs of eyes > > On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Myles Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm tired of staring at this piece of code wondering why printk isn't > > working as I expected. Can someone point out what I've obviously > missed? > > > > code (inserted in pci_device.c in pci_get_resource() right before the > limit > > mask and return): > > if (resource->flags) > > { > > printk(BIOS_DEBUG, "%s resource base %08lx limit %08lx size %08lx > flags > > %08lx\n", > > dev_path(dev), resource->base, resource->limit, > > resource->size, resource->flags); > > typedef u64 resource_t; > struct resource { > resource_t base; /* Base address of the resource */ > resource_t size; /* Size of the resource */ > resource_t limit; /* Largest valid value base + size -1 */ > unsigned long flags; /* Descriptions of the kind of resource */ > unsigned long index; /* Bus specific per device resource id */ > unsigned char align; /* Required alignment (log 2) of the > resource */ > unsigned char gran; /* Granularity (log 2) of the resource */ > /* Alignment must be >= the granularity of the resource */ > }; > > Look at the type of resource_t. 64 bits. > Your printk is printing 64-bit fields as 32 bits. Things are going to > get very confused. > > A common problem.
Should I go through and make all the resource holders resource_t instead of unsigned long? They're mixed right now. I was expecting that my 64-bit values would lose their upper bits, but I wasn't expecting what I got. Thanks, Myles -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
