Hi!
> > > Why would we end up with an overestimation if we check the I/O ports at
> > > boot time? Do you have concrete cases in mind?
> >
> > ACPI will often describe large operation regions, but won't necessarily
> > touch all of them. Effectively, every codepath would have to be walked
> > through at boot time and checked for io access.
>
> Is there anything preventing us from doing such a walk and pre-allocate
> all the I/O ranges? I am not familiar with the ACPI code at all, would
> you possibly propose a patch doing that?
ACPI AML is probably turing-complete: I'm afraid you are trying to
solve the halting problem (-> impossible).
Pavel
>
> If we can't do that, the overestimation approach might still work. I
> wonder if it would cause problems in practice. If it does, we're back
> to Pavel's AML lock.
>
> --
> Jean Delvare
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures)
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
