Hi Simon, On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Simon Glass <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > On 8 June 2015 at 06:32, Andrew Bradford <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi Bin / Simon, >> >> On 06/08 10:57, Bin Meng wrote: >>> Hi Simon, >>> >>> On Sun, Jun 7, 2015 at 10:50 PM, Simon Glass <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > Commit afbbd413a fixed this for non-driver-model. Make sure that the >>> > driver >>> > model code handles this also. >>> > >>> > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <[email protected]> >>> > --- >>> > >>> > drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c | 3 ++- >>> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> > >>> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c b/drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c >>> > index edec93f..4255c02 100644 >>> > --- a/drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c >>> > +++ b/drivers/pci/pci-uclass.c >>> > @@ -495,7 +495,8 @@ static int decode_regions(struct pci_controller >>> > *hose, const void *blob, >>> > >>> > /* Add a region for our local memory */ >>> > pci_set_region(hose->regions + hose->region_count++, 0, 0, >>> > - gd->ram_size, PCI_REGION_MEM | >>> > PCI_REGION_SYS_MEMORY); >>> > + gd->ram_size < 0x80000000U ? gd->ram_size : >>> > 0x80000000U, >>> > + PCI_REGION_MEM | PCI_REGION_SYS_MEMORY); >>> > >>> > return 0; >>> > } >>> > -- >>> >>> I think this is specific to baytrail fsp configuration. It should not >>> be put into a common driver. >> >> Yes, I agree with Bin, this is likely only a Bay Trail (or maybe a very >> small number of other processors) configuration. I believe your change >> here will impact all PCI hosts which have > 2 GiB of RAM. >> >> It might be a bit ugly to have an #ifdef in this file, it all seems like >> nice clean generic code. But maybe it's not a big deal to limit all >> u-boot to 2 GiB of RAM for this region? >
Yep, maybe not a big deal, but it may also break some boards if the allocated buffer for PCI device happens to be above 2 GiB, but that case might be rare (ie: like 3 GiB memory is installed where on most cases we only see boards with 1 GiB, 2 GiB, 4 GiB memory) > Yes, this will bite us when something else moves PCI to driver model > and we may as well fix it now. > > What is the best option? We could add a pci_max_addr to global_data > perhaps? This could be set to ram_size for most machines, and adjusted > for x86. I'd prefer to avoid #ifdef CONFIG_X86. Adding pci_max_addr to global_data sounds good if we want to avoid #ifdefs. It would be good to hear more comments from other domains? Regards, Bin _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
