On Tuesday 03 February 2015 11:37:30 Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Side question: In the probe-only case, should we still allow this write
> to happen?
No, my understanding is that PCI_PROBE_ONLY precisely means that we
do not modify the config space and instead trust what is there to
be sensible.
On 03/02/15 11:31, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 03 February 2015 10:38:25 Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>
>> That's exactly what I thought until Lorenzo reported kvmtool falling
>> over because of this write. Obviously, some platforms must actually
>> require this (possibly for bridges that are not
On Tuesday 03 February 2015 10:38:25 Marc Zyngier wrote:
>
> That's exactly what I thought until Lorenzo reported kvmtool falling
> over because of this write. Obviously, some platforms must actually
> require this (possibly for bridges that are not known by the firmware).
This sounds much like
On 02/02/15 17:02, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 28 January 2015 14:51:23 Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> void __weak pcibios_update_irq(struct pci_dev *dev, int irq)
>> {
>> - dev_dbg(>dev, "assigning IRQ %02d\n", irq);
>> - pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, irq);
>> +
On Tuesday 03 February 2015 10:38:25 Marc Zyngier wrote:
That's exactly what I thought until Lorenzo reported kvmtool falling
over because of this write. Obviously, some platforms must actually
require this (possibly for bridges that are not known by the firmware).
This sounds much like a
On 03/02/15 11:31, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tuesday 03 February 2015 10:38:25 Marc Zyngier wrote:
That's exactly what I thought until Lorenzo reported kvmtool falling
over because of this write. Obviously, some platforms must actually
require this (possibly for bridges that are not known by
On Tuesday 03 February 2015 11:37:30 Marc Zyngier wrote:
Side question: In the probe-only case, should we still allow this write
to happen?
No, my understanding is that PCI_PROBE_ONLY precisely means that we
do not modify the config space and instead trust what is there to
be sensible.
On 02/02/15 17:02, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Wednesday 28 January 2015 14:51:23 Marc Zyngier wrote:
void __weak pcibios_update_irq(struct pci_dev *dev, int irq)
{
- dev_dbg(dev-dev, assigning IRQ %02d\n, irq);
- pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, irq);
+ struct
On Wednesday 28 January 2015 14:51:23 Marc Zyngier wrote:
> void __weak pcibios_update_irq(struct pci_dev *dev, int irq)
> {
> - dev_dbg(>dev, "assigning IRQ %02d\n", irq);
> - pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, irq);
> + struct irq_data *d;
> +
> + d =
On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 06:08:17PM +, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Hi Russell,
>
> On 02/02/15 16:33, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > What your change would mean is that the IRQs currently being programmed
> >> = 16 would be programmed into with numbers with 16 removed from them.
> > This means
Hi Russell,
On 02/02/15 16:33, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 02:51:23PM +, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> void __weak pcibios_update_irq(struct pci_dev *dev, int irq)
>> {
>> -dev_dbg(>dev, "assigning IRQ %02d\n", irq);
>> -pci_write_config_byte(dev,
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 02:51:23PM +, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> void __weak pcibios_update_irq(struct pci_dev *dev, int irq)
> {
> - dev_dbg(>dev, "assigning IRQ %02d\n", irq);
> - pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, irq);
> + struct irq_data *d;
> +
> + d =
On 02/02/15 15:57, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> pcibios_update_irq writes an irq number into the config space
>> of a given PCI device, but ignores the fact that this number
>> is a virtual interrupt number, which might be a very different
>>
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 28/01/15 15:43, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>> Hi Gerry,
>>>
>>> On 28/01/15 15:21, Jiang Liu wrote:
On 2015/1/28 22:51, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> pcibios_update_irq writes
On 28/01/15 15:43, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> Hi Gerry,
>>
>> On 28/01/15 15:21, Jiang Liu wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2015/1/28 22:51, Marc Zyngier wrote:
pcibios_update_irq writes an irq number into the config space
of a given PCI device,
On 2015/2/2 23:57, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> pcibios_update_irq writes an irq number into the config space
>> of a given PCI device, but ignores the fact that this number
>> is a virtual interrupt number, which might be a very different
>>
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> pcibios_update_irq writes an irq number into the config space
> of a given PCI device, but ignores the fact that this number
> is a virtual interrupt number, which might be a very different
> value from what the underlying hardware is using.
On 2015/2/2 23:57, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Marc Zyngier marc.zyng...@arm.com wrote:
pcibios_update_irq writes an irq number into the config space
of a given PCI device, but ignores the fact that this number
is a virtual interrupt number, which might be a very
On 28/01/15 15:43, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Marc Zyngier marc.zyng...@arm.com wrote:
Hi Gerry,
On 28/01/15 15:21, Jiang Liu wrote:
On 2015/1/28 22:51, Marc Zyngier wrote:
pcibios_update_irq writes an irq number into the config space
of a given PCI device, but
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Marc Zyngier marc.zyng...@arm.com wrote:
pcibios_update_irq writes an irq number into the config space
of a given PCI device, but ignores the fact that this number
is a virtual interrupt number, which might be a very different
value from what the underlying
On 02/02/15 15:57, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Marc Zyngier marc.zyng...@arm.com wrote:
pcibios_update_irq writes an irq number into the config space
of a given PCI device, but ignores the fact that this number
is a virtual interrupt number, which might be a very
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 02:51:23PM +, Marc Zyngier wrote:
void __weak pcibios_update_irq(struct pci_dev *dev, int irq)
{
- dev_dbg(dev-dev, assigning IRQ %02d\n, irq);
- pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, irq);
+ struct irq_data *d;
+
+ d =
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Marc Zyngier marc.zyng...@arm.com wrote:
On 28/01/15 15:43, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Marc Zyngier marc.zyng...@arm.com wrote:
Hi Gerry,
On 28/01/15 15:21, Jiang Liu wrote:
On 2015/1/28 22:51, Marc Zyngier wrote:
On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 06:08:17PM +, Marc Zyngier wrote:
Hi Russell,
On 02/02/15 16:33, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
What your change would mean is that the IRQs currently being programmed
= 16 would be programmed into with numbers with 16 removed from them.
This means that
Hi Russell,
On 02/02/15 16:33, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 02:51:23PM +, Marc Zyngier wrote:
void __weak pcibios_update_irq(struct pci_dev *dev, int irq)
{
-dev_dbg(dev-dev, assigning IRQ %02d\n, irq);
-pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE,
On Wednesday 28 January 2015 14:51:23 Marc Zyngier wrote:
void __weak pcibios_update_irq(struct pci_dev *dev, int irq)
{
- dev_dbg(dev-dev, assigning IRQ %02d\n, irq);
- pci_write_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, irq);
+ struct irq_data *d;
+
+ d =
On 2015/1/28 22:51, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> pcibios_update_irq writes an irq number into the config space
> of a given PCI device, but ignores the fact that this number
> is a virtual interrupt number, which might be a very different
> value from what the underlying hardware is using.
>
> The
Hi Gerry,
On 28/01/15 15:21, Jiang Liu wrote:
>
>
> On 2015/1/28 22:51, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> pcibios_update_irq writes an irq number into the config space
>> of a given PCI device, but ignores the fact that this number
>> is a virtual interrupt number, which might be a very different
>> value
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Hi Gerry,
>
> On 28/01/15 15:21, Jiang Liu wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2015/1/28 22:51, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>> pcibios_update_irq writes an irq number into the config space
>>> of a given PCI device, but ignores the fact that this number
>>> is a
Hi Gerry,
On 28/01/15 15:21, Jiang Liu wrote:
On 2015/1/28 22:51, Marc Zyngier wrote:
pcibios_update_irq writes an irq number into the config space
of a given PCI device, but ignores the fact that this number
is a virtual interrupt number, which might be a very different
value from what
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Marc Zyngier marc.zyng...@arm.com wrote:
Hi Gerry,
On 28/01/15 15:21, Jiang Liu wrote:
On 2015/1/28 22:51, Marc Zyngier wrote:
pcibios_update_irq writes an irq number into the config space
of a given PCI device, but ignores the fact that this number
is a
On 2015/1/28 22:51, Marc Zyngier wrote:
pcibios_update_irq writes an irq number into the config space
of a given PCI device, but ignores the fact that this number
is a virtual interrupt number, which might be a very different
value from what the underlying hardware is using.
The obvious
32 matches
Mail list logo
