Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2016-09-01 Thread Myron Stowe
Here it is a year later and there has basically been no progress on this ongoing situation. I still often encounter bugs raised against the kernel w.r.t. unmet resource allocations - here is the most recent example, I'll attach the 'dmesg' log from the platform at

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2016-09-01 Thread Myron Stowe
Here it is a year later and there has basically been no progress on this ongoing situation. I still often encounter bugs raised against the kernel w.r.t. unmet resource allocations - here is the most recent example, I'll attach the 'dmesg' log from the platform at

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-27 Thread Myron Stowe
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 8:47 PM, Myron Stowe wrote: snip > > There is a kernel boot parameter, pci=norom, that is intended to disable the > kernel's resource assignment actions for Expansion ROMs that do not already > have BIOS assigned address ranges. Note however, if I remember correctly, >

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-27 Thread Myron Stowe
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 8:47 PM, Myron Stowe wrote: snip > > The kernel expects device Expansion ROM BARs to be programmed with valid > values - even if the respective Expansion ROM's Enable bit is 0 (i.e. the > device’s expansion ROM address space is disabled). This seems to be the > main

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-27 Thread Myron Stowe
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 8:47 PM, Myron Stowe wrote: snip > > There is a kernel boot parameter, pci=norom, that is intended to disable the > kernel's resource assignment actions for Expansion ROMs that do not already > have BIOS assigned address ranges. Note however, if I

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-27 Thread Myron Stowe
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 8:47 PM, Myron Stowe wrote: snip > > The kernel expects device Expansion ROM BARs to be programmed with valid > values - even if the respective Expansion ROM's Enable bit is 0 (i.e. the > device’s expansion ROM address space is disabled). This seems

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-26 Thread Daniel J Blueman
On Thursday, September 24, 2015 at 10:50:07 AM UTC+8, Myron Stowe wrote: > I've encountered numerous bugzilla reports related to platform BIOS' not > programming valid values into a PCI device's Type 0 Configuration space > "Expansion ROM Base Address" field (a.k.a. Expansion ROM BAR). The main >

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-26 Thread Daniel J Blueman
On Thursday, September 24, 2015 at 10:50:07 AM UTC+8, Myron Stowe wrote: > I've encountered numerous bugzilla reports related to platform BIOS' not > programming valid values into a PCI device's Type 0 Configuration space > "Expansion ROM Base Address" field (a.k.a. Expansion ROM BAR). The main >

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-25 Thread Yinghai Lu
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 9:18 AM, Alex Williamson wrote: >> > > Or do we want to keep a white list to say which device should have >> > > ROM bar as mush have, and other is optional to have ? >> > >> > Subject: [RFC PATCH] PCI: Add pci_dev_need_rom_bar() >> > >> > Only set that for >> > 1. if

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-25 Thread Myron Stowe
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 7:31 AM, Myron Stowe wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:35 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: >> >>> Or do we want to keep a white list to say which device should have >>> ROM bar as mush have, and other is optional to have ? >

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-25 Thread Alex Williamson
On Fri, 2015-09-25 at 09:35 -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 09:35:20PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: > > > > > Or do we want to keep a white list to say which device should have > > > ROM bar as mush have, and other is

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-25 Thread Bjorn Helgaas
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 09:35:20PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: > > > Or do we want to keep a white list to say which device should have > > ROM bar as mush have, and other is optional to have ? > > Subject: [RFC PATCH] PCI: Add

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-25 Thread Myron Stowe
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:35 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: > >> Or do we want to keep a white list to say which device should have >> ROM bar as mush have, and other is optional to have ? I suppose this idea is one possible outcome that could occur

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-25 Thread Bjorn Helgaas
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 09:35:20PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: > > > Or do we want to keep a white list to say which device should have > > ROM bar as mush have, and other is optional to have ? > > Subject: [RFC PATCH] PCI:

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-25 Thread Alex Williamson
On Fri, 2015-09-25 at 09:35 -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 09:35:20PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: > > > > > Or do we want to keep a white list to say which device should have > > > ROM bar as mush

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-25 Thread Myron Stowe
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 7:31 AM, Myron Stowe wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:35 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: >> >>> Or do we want to keep a white list to say which device should

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-25 Thread Yinghai Lu
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 9:18 AM, Alex Williamson wrote: >> > > Or do we want to keep a white list to say which device should have >> > > ROM bar as mush have, and other is optional to have ? >> > >> > Subject: [RFC PATCH] PCI: Add pci_dev_need_rom_bar() >> > >> > Only

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-25 Thread Myron Stowe
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:35 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: > >> Or do we want to keep a white list to say which device should have >> ROM bar as mush have, and other is optional to have ? I suppose this idea

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-24 Thread Yinghai Lu
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: > Or do we want to keep a white list to say which device should have > ROM bar as mush have, and other is optional to have ? Subject: [RFC PATCH] PCI: Add pci_dev_need_rom_bar() Only set that for 1. if BIOS/firmware already set ROM bar. 2.

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-24 Thread Yinghai Lu
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Myron Stowe wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 9:21 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 7:47 PM, Myron Stowe wrote: >>> >>> The kernel expects device Expansion ROM BARs to be programmed with valid >>> values - even if the respective Expansion ROM's

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-24 Thread Myron Stowe
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 9:21 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 7:47 PM, Myron Stowe wrote: >> >> The kernel expects device Expansion ROM BARs to be programmed with valid >> values - even if the respective Expansion ROM's Enable bit is 0 (i.e. the >> device’s expansion ROM address

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-24 Thread Yinghai Lu
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Myron Stowe wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 9:21 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 7:47 PM, Myron Stowe wrote: >>> >>> The kernel expects device Expansion ROM BARs to be

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-24 Thread Yinghai Lu
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: > Or do we want to keep a white list to say which device should have > ROM bar as mush have, and other is optional to have ? Subject: [RFC PATCH] PCI: Add pci_dev_need_rom_bar() Only set that for 1. if BIOS/firmware

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-24 Thread Myron Stowe
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 9:21 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 7:47 PM, Myron Stowe wrote: >> >> The kernel expects device Expansion ROM BARs to be programmed with valid >> values - even if the respective Expansion ROM's Enable bit is 0

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-23 Thread Alex Williamson
On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 20:21 -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 7:47 PM, Myron Stowe wrote: > > > > The kernel expects device Expansion ROM BARs to be programmed with valid > > values - even if the respective Expansion ROM's Enable bit is 0 (i.e. the > > device’s expansion ROM

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-23 Thread Yinghai Lu
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 7:47 PM, Myron Stowe wrote: > > The kernel expects device Expansion ROM BARs to be programmed with valid > values - even if the respective Expansion ROM's Enable bit is 0 (i.e. the > device’s expansion ROM address space is disabled). This seems to be the > main contention

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-23 Thread Alex Williamson
On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 20:21 -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: > On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 7:47 PM, Myron Stowe wrote: > > > > The kernel expects device Expansion ROM BARs to be programmed with valid > > values - even if the respective Expansion ROM's Enable bit is 0 (i.e. the > >

Re: [RFC] PCI: Unassigned Expansion ROM BARs

2015-09-23 Thread Yinghai Lu
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 7:47 PM, Myron Stowe wrote: > > The kernel expects device Expansion ROM BARs to be programmed with valid > values - even if the respective Expansion ROM's Enable bit is 0 (i.e. the > device’s expansion ROM address space is disabled). This seems to