On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 20:36:59 -0500 Tony Camuso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks, Arjan. > > The problem we have been experiencing has to do with Northbridges, > not with devices. correct for now. HOWEVER, and this is the point Linus has made several times: Just about NOBODY has devices that need the extended config space. At all. So making this opt-in for devices allows our users to boot and use their system if they are in the majority that has no need for even getting close to this mess. > > As far as the device is concerned, after the Northbridge translates > the config access into PCI bus cycles, the device has no idea what > mechanism drove the Northbridge to the translation. Wanne bet there'll be devices that screw this up? THere's devices that even screwed up the 64-256 region after all. > The patch I devised concerned itself with Northbridges and separated > MMCONFIG-compliant buses from those that could not handle MMCONFIG. THis kind of patchup has been going on for the better part of a year (well 2 years) by now and it's STILL NOT ENOUGH, as you can see by the more patchups that have been proposed as "alternative" to my approach. > > In my humble opinion, Port IO config access is here to stay, having > been defined as an architected mechanism in the PCI 2.1 spec. > > This is most especially true for x86. > > In other words, for x86, I don't think we need to worry about Port > IO config access ever going away at all. You're wrong there. Sad to say, but you're wrong there. -- If you want to reach me at my work email, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
