On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 06:14:49PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
> Hi Bjorn,
>
> On Friday 09 February 2018 03:27 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 06:17:32PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Thursday 08 February 2018 06:03 PM, Niklas Cassel
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 06:14:49PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
> Hi Bjorn,
>
> On Friday 09 February 2018 03:27 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 06:17:32PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Thursday 08 February 2018 06:03 PM, Niklas Cassel
Hi Bjorn,
On Friday 09 February 2018 03:27 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 06:17:32PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thursday 08 February 2018 06:03 PM, Niklas Cassel wrote:
>>> A 64-bit BAR uses the succeeding BAR for the upper bits, therefore
>>> we
Hi Bjorn,
On Friday 09 February 2018 03:27 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 06:17:32PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thursday 08 February 2018 06:03 PM, Niklas Cassel wrote:
>>> A 64-bit BAR uses the succeeding BAR for the upper bits, therefore
>>> we
On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 06:17:32PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thursday 08 February 2018 06:03 PM, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> > A 64-bit BAR uses the succeeding BAR for the upper bits, therefore
> > we cannot call pci_epc_set_bar() on a BAR that follows a 64-bit BAR.
> >
> > If
On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 06:17:32PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thursday 08 February 2018 06:03 PM, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> > A 64-bit BAR uses the succeeding BAR for the upper bits, therefore
> > we cannot call pci_epc_set_bar() on a BAR that follows a 64-bit BAR.
> >
> > If
On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 06:17:32PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thursday 08 February 2018 06:03 PM, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> > A 64-bit BAR uses the succeeding BAR for the upper bits, therefore
> > we cannot call pci_epc_set_bar() on a BAR that follows a 64-bit BAR.
> >
> > If
On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 06:17:32PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thursday 08 February 2018 06:03 PM, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> > A 64-bit BAR uses the succeeding BAR for the upper bits, therefore
> > we cannot call pci_epc_set_bar() on a BAR that follows a 64-bit BAR.
> >
> > If
Hi,
On Thursday 08 February 2018 06:03 PM, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> A 64-bit BAR uses the succeeding BAR for the upper bits, therefore
> we cannot call pci_epc_set_bar() on a BAR that follows a 64-bit BAR.
>
> If pci_epc_set_bar() is called with flag PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_64,
Not related to
Hi,
On Thursday 08 February 2018 06:03 PM, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> A 64-bit BAR uses the succeeding BAR for the upper bits, therefore
> we cannot call pci_epc_set_bar() on a BAR that follows a 64-bit BAR.
>
> If pci_epc_set_bar() is called with flag PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_64,
Not related to
A 64-bit BAR uses the succeeding BAR for the upper bits, therefore
we cannot call pci_epc_set_bar() on a BAR that follows a 64-bit BAR.
If pci_epc_set_bar() is called with flag PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_64,
it has to be up to the controller driver to write both BAR[x] and BAR[x+1]
(and
A 64-bit BAR uses the succeeding BAR for the upper bits, therefore
we cannot call pci_epc_set_bar() on a BAR that follows a 64-bit BAR.
If pci_epc_set_bar() is called with flag PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_64,
it has to be up to the controller driver to write both BAR[x] and BAR[x+1]
(and
12 matches
Mail list logo