[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v1 09/47] vidoe: fbdev: atyfb: remove and fix MTRR MMIO "hole" work around
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 11:56:55PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 08:57:59PM +0100, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 12:43:55PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxx> > > > wrote: > > > > On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 11:15:14AM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > > >> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 04:17:59PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > > >> > diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/aty/atyfb_base.c > > > >> > b/drivers/video/fbdev/aty/atyfb_base.c > > > >> > index 8025624..8875e56 100644 > > > >> > --- a/drivers/video/fbdev/aty/atyfb_base.c > > > >> > +++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/aty/atyfb_base.c > > > >> > @@ -2630,21 +2630,10 @@ static int aty_init(struct fb_info *info) > > > >> > > > > >> > #ifdef CONFIG_MTRR > > > >> > par->mtrr_aper = -1; > > > >> > - par->mtrr_reg = -1; > > > >> > if (!nomtrr) { > > > >> > - /* Cover the whole resource. */ > > > >> > - par->mtrr_aper = mtrr_add(par->res_start, par->res_size, > > > >> > + par->mtrr_aper = mtrr_add(info->fix.smem_start, > > > >> > + info->fix.smem_len, > > > >> > MTRR_TYPE_WRCOMB, 1); > > > >> > > > >> MTRRs need power of two size, so how is this supposed to work? > > > > > > > > As per mtrr_add_page() [0] the base and size are just supposed to be in > > > > units > > > > of 4 KiB, although the practice is to use powers of 2 in *some* drivers > > > > this > > > > is not standardized and by no means recorded as a requirement. Obviously > > > > powers of 2 will work too and you'd end up neatly aligned as well. > > > > mtrr_add() > > > > will use mtrr_check() to verify the the same requirement. Furthermore, > > > > as per my commit log message: > > > > > > Whatever the code may or may not do, the x86 architecture uses > > > power-of-two MTRR sizes. So I'm confused. > > > > There should be no confusion, I simply did not know that *was* the > > requirement for x86, if that is the case we should add a check for that > > and perhaps generalize a helper that does the power of two helper changes, > > the cleanest I found was the vesafb driver solution. > > > > Thoughts? > > The vesafb solution is bad since you'll only end up covering only > the first 4MB of the framebuffer instead of the almost 8MB you want. OK so the power of 2 requirement implicates us *having* to use a large MTRR that includes the MMIo region in the shared PCI case? Andy, Ville, are we 100% certain about this power of two requirement? Is that for the base and size or just the size? Luis _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |