On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 06:14:49PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
> Hi Bjorn,
> On Friday 09 February 2018 03:27 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 06:17:32PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> On Thursday 08 February 2018 06:03 PM, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> >>> A 64-bit BAR uses the succeeding BAR for the upper bits, therefore
> >>> we cannot call pci_epc_set_bar() on a BAR that follows a 64-bit BAR.
> >>> If pci_epc_set_bar() is called with flag PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_64,
> >> Not related to $patch. But I have a query on when
> >> PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_64 should be set. Whether if the size is >
> >> 4G or if the address can be mapped anywhere in the 64-bit PCIe
> >> address space or both?
> > In general, PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_64 should be set if the BAR is
> > 64 bits wide. IORESOURCE_MEM_64 is similar.
> okay, if the HW support 64bit BAR, 64 bit flag should be set and not based on
> size or anything else?
Yes, I completely agree with Bjorn. Actually it would be a good idea to
make the struct pci_epf->bar member array an array of struct resources
to simplify its handling.