From: Corey Minyard <cminy...@mvista.com>

Commit d61a3ead2680 ("[PATCH] IPMI: reserve I/O ports separately")
changed the way I/O ports were reserved and includes this comment in
log:

 Some BIOSes reserve disjoint I/O regions in their ACPI tables for the IPMI
 controller.  This causes problems when trying to register the entire I/O
 region.  Therefore we must register each I/O port separately.

There is a similar problem with memio regions on an arm64 platform
(AMD Seattle). Where I see:

 ipmi message handler version 39.2
 ipmi_si AMDI0300:00: probing via device tree
 ipmi_si AMDI0300:00: ipmi_si: probing via ACPI
 ipmi_si AMDI0300:00: [mem 0xe0010000] regsize 1 spacing 4 irq 23
 ipmi_si: Adding ACPI-specified kcs state machine
 IPMI System Interface driver.
 ipmi_si: Trying ACPI-specified kcs state machine at mem \
          address 0xe0010000, slave address 0x0, irq 23
 ipmi_si: Could not set up I/O space

The problem is that the ACPI core registers disjoint regions for the
platform device:

e0010000-e0010000 : AMDI0300:00
e0010004-e0010004 : AMDI0300:00

and the ipmi_si driver tries to register one region e0010000-e0010004.

Based on a patch from Mark Salter <msal...@redhat.com>

Signed-off-by: Corey Minyard <cminy...@mvista.com>
---
 drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_si_intf.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_si_intf.c b/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_si_intf.c
index 6ecf9af..a815044 100644
--- a/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_si_intf.c
+++ b/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_si_intf.c
@@ -1637,25 +1637,28 @@ static void mem_outq(const struct si_sm_io *io, 
unsigned int offset,
 }
 #endif
 
-static void mem_cleanup(struct smi_info *info)
+static void mem_region_cleanup(struct smi_info *info, int num)
 {
        unsigned long addr = info->io.addr_data;
-       int           mapsize;
+       int idx;
+
+       for (idx = 0; idx < num; idx++)
+               release_mem_region(addr + idx * info->io.regspacing,
+                                  info->io.regsize);
+}
 
+static void mem_cleanup(struct smi_info *info)
+{
        if (info->io.addr) {
                iounmap(info->io.addr);
-
-               mapsize = ((info->io_size * info->io.regspacing)
-                          - (info->io.regspacing - info->io.regsize));
-
-               release_mem_region(addr, mapsize);
+               mem_region_cleanup(info, info->io_size);
        }
 }
 
 static int mem_setup(struct smi_info *info)
 {
        unsigned long addr = info->io.addr_data;
-       int           mapsize;
+       int           mapsize, idx;
 
        if (!addr)
                return -ENODEV;
@@ -1692,6 +1695,21 @@ static int mem_setup(struct smi_info *info)
        }
 
        /*
+        * Some BIOSes reserve disjoint memory regions in their ACPI
+        * tables.  This causes problems when trying to request the
+        * entire region.  Therefore we must request each register
+        * separately.
+        */
+       for (idx = 0; idx < info->io_size; idx++) {
+               if (request_mem_region(addr + idx * info->io.regspacing,
+                                      info->io.regsize, DEVICE_NAME) == NULL) {
+                       /* Undo allocations */
+                       mem_region_cleanup(info, idx);
+                       return -EIO;
+               }
+       }
+
+       /*
         * Calculate the total amount of memory to claim.  This is an
         * unusual looking calculation, but it avoids claiming any
         * more memory than it has to.  It will claim everything
@@ -1700,13 +1718,9 @@ static int mem_setup(struct smi_info *info)
         */
        mapsize = ((info->io_size * info->io.regspacing)
                   - (info->io.regspacing - info->io.regsize));
-
-       if (request_mem_region(addr, mapsize, DEVICE_NAME) == NULL)
-               return -EIO;
-
        info->io.addr = ioremap(addr, mapsize);
        if (info->io.addr == NULL) {
-               release_mem_region(addr, mapsize);
+               mem_region_cleanup(info, info->io_size);
                return -EIO;
        }
        return 0;
-- 
2.7.4

Reply via email to