Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 13:32:35 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> Cc: Gustau =?utf-8?q?P=C3=A9rez_i_Querol?= <gperez@entel.upc.edu>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Problem adding more than 8 network adapters Message-ID: <201208291332.35888.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <503E2453.9040407@FreeBSD.org> References: <503C930C.3010405@entel.upc.edu> <503E1F02.6050505@entel.upc.edu> <503E2453.9040407@FreeBSD.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Wednesday, August 29, 2012 10:16:51 am Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 29/08/2012 16:54 Gustau Pérez i Querol said the following: > > Al 29/08/2012 15:30, En/na Andriy Gapon ha escrit: > >> I wonder where the discrepancy could come from. > >> Why would VirtualBox emulate the bridge differently for different OSes? > >> And I do not see any quirks related to bus numbers for this PCI ID in either > >> Linux, FreeBSD or lspci code... > >> > >> I think that output of lspci on FreeBSD could be interesting too (it's available > >> via sysutils/pciutils port). > >> > > > > The output of lspci gives the same info as pciconf. I'm attaching it however. > [snip] > > 00:18.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801 Mobile PCI Bridge (rev f2) (prog-if 01 [Subtractive decode]) > > Flags: bus master, 66MHz, fast devsel, latency 0 > > Bus: primary=01, secondary=01, subordinate=02, sec-latency=0 > > !!! Unknown I/O range types e0/df > > !!! Unknown memory range types f100/f0ff > > > > 00:19.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801 Mobile PCI Bridge (rev f2) (prog-if 01 [Subtractive decode]) > > Flags: bus master, 66MHz, fast devsel, latency 0 > > Bus: primary=02, secondary=02, subordinate=03, sec-latency=0 > > !!! Unknown I/O range types e0/df > > !!! Unknown memory range types f100/f0ff > > I think that I was wrong with regard to Linux. I see that it does extensive > bridge reconfiguring if it notices any insanity. And I'd say that VirtualBix does > create an insane config here. > I believe that primary should be 0, secondary should be 1 and 2 respectively (as > they are) and subordinate should be equal to secondary. So primary bus numbers > and subordinate bus numbers are insane here. > I am not sure how much the incorrect bus numbers actually affect FreeBSD PCI-PCI > driver as it does not seem to use primary and subordinate numbers for anything > important. The problem is that it affects the routing of PCI config requests, so it needs to be correct. Fixing our PCI code to properly renumber buses as needed is a WIP I have, but it's not ready for testing yet to see if it would help with this case. -- John Baldwinhelp
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201208291332.35888.jhb>