[PATCH 05/15] pci: resource assignment based on p2p alignment

Ram Pai linuxram at us.ibm.com
Wed Jul 18 14:25:12 EST 2012


On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 11:14:51AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 4:38 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
> <benh at kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 18:03 +0800, Ram Pai wrote:
> >>         Lets say we passed that 'type' flag to size the minimum
> >>         alignment constraints for that b_res.  And window_alignment(bus,
> >>         type) of your platform  used that 'type' information to
> >>         determine whether to use the alignment constraints of 32-bit
> >>         window or 64-bit window.
> >>
> >>         However, later when the b_res is actually allocated a resource,
> >>         the pci_assign_resource() has no idea whether to allocate 32-bit
> >>         window resource or 64-bit window resource, because the 'type'
> >>         information is not captured anywhere in b_res.
> >>
> >>         You would basically have a disconnect between what is sized and
> >>         what is allocated. Unless offcourse you pass that 'type' to
> >>         the b_res->flags, which is currently not the case.
> >
> > Right, we ideally would need the core to query the alignment once per
> > "apertures" it tries as a candidate to allocate a given resource... but
> > that's for later.
> >
> > For now we can probably live with giving out the max of the minimum
> > alignment we support for M64 and our M32 segment size.
> 
> We already know the aperture we're proposing to allocate from (the
> result of find_free_bus_resource()), don't we?  What if we passed it
> to pcibios_window_alignment() along with the struct pci_bus *, e.g.:
> 
>   resource_size_t pcibios_window_alignment(struct pci_bus *bus, struct
> resource *window)

Hmm..'struct resource *window' may not yet know which aperature it is
allocated from. Will it? We are still in the sizing process, the allocation will
be done much later.

RP



More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list