[coreboot] Extra pairs of eyes

Myles Watson mylesgw at gmail.com
Tue Oct 14 23:26:30 CEST 2008


On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 3:23 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <
c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006 at gmx.net> wrote:

> On 14.10.2008 23:13, Myles Watson wrote:
> > I'm tired of staring at this piece of code wondering why printk isn't
> > working as I expected.  Can someone point out what I've obviously missed?
> >
> > code (inserted in pci_device.c in pci_get_resource() right before the
> limit
> > mask and return):
> >     if (resource->flags)
> >     {
> >     printk(BIOS_DEBUG, "%s resource base %08lx limit %08lx size %08lx
> flags
> > %08lx\n",
> >                    dev_path(dev), resource->base, resource->limit,
> >                 resource->size, resource->flags);
> >
> >     printk(BIOS_DEBUG, "\t%s size %lx align %lx gran %lx\n",
> >             dev_path(dev), resource->size,
> >             resource->align, resource->gran);
> >     printk(BIOS_DEBUG, " just broken size %08lx\n", resource->size);
> >
> >     printk(BIOS_DEBUG, " broken align %lx\n", resource->align);
> >     printk(BIOS_DEBUG, "%s resource size %08lx flags %08lx\n",
> >                    dev_path(dev), resource->size, resource->flags);
> >
> >     printk(BIOS_DEBUG, "%s align %lx gran %lx\n",
> >             dev_path(dev),
> >             resource->align, resource->gran);
> >     }
> > output:
> > PCI: 01:00.0 resource base 00000000 limit 00000000 size ffffffff flags
> > 00000000
> >     PCI: 01:00.0 size 1000 align 0 gran c
> >  just broken size 00001000
> >  broken align c
> > PCI: 01:00.0 resource size 00001000 flags 00000000
> > PCI: 01:00.0 align c gran c
> >
> > Notice that size is ffffffff in the first, 0x1000 in the rest.
> > Align is 0 in the first, c in the rest.
> >
> > It looks like printk is botching it.  I don't know how else to explain
> it.
> > Is there a limit to the number of arguments you can pass to printk?
> >
>
> From a quick glance, this looks strange. Is this v2 or v3?


v3


> I don't trust
> the v3 printk at the moment because I've not reviewed r921 yet.



> Oh, and please be aware that any multicore/multiprocessor machine in v3
> is completely BROKEN right now and has been that way for months. (Yes, I
> have a fix in the queue. Remind me in a few days.)


single core, single processor.

Thanks,
Myles
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/attachments/20081014/4de46d94/attachment.html>


More information about the coreboot mailing list