On 11/07/13 22:21, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 07/11/2013 22:12, Laszlo Ersek ha scritto: >> 0000000000000000-7ffffffffffffffe (prio 0, RW): system >> [...] >> 0000000060000000-00000000ffffffff (prio 0, RW): alias pci-hole @pci >> 0000000060000000-00000000ffffffff >> [...] >> 00000000ffe00000-00000000ffffffff (prio 0, R-): system.flash >> [...] > > Priorities are not "transitive" across aliases; once you use an alias to > map a region, the alias's priority counts, not the target region's > priority. So the INT_MIN priority for pci-master-abort counts *within > the alias*, but the choice between pci-hole and system.flash is only > affected by the priorities of pci-hole and system.flash.
Right. It's also documented in docs/memory.txt -- Peter's recent addition I think? > You could give a smaller priority (-1 or INT_MIN) to pci-hole and just > let it occupy the whole address space, from 0 to UINT64_MAX. Or perhaps > the pci-hole alias is too large and it should end before the system > flash area. Both solutions should work. I did reorder pci-hole and system.flash, but rather than lowering pci-hole, I raised system.flash. I have no preference. Thanks Laszlo ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/edk2-devel
