From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=2607:f8b0:400e:c05::244; helo=mail-pg0-x244.google.com; envelope-from=heyi.guo@linaro.org; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from mail-pg0-x244.google.com (mail-pg0-x244.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A51982274F3CD for ; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 18:20:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg0-x244.google.com with SMTP id f132so3500898pgc.10 for ; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 18:20:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=e0JyWU1vn5oGglCL3uIRpOFkV1NHnX7MQfiVSxBAwoY=; b=NpyYSac2NEk0QibKyh+o/HFg/HDYC2cdn37+riR8AVv+Rbj/KOgW34UrwPIcGUOYcH /x9aHBLFgsKCg4RXO0PcUbDXPgp8hRDN29b6H6dY5mr/3PhNgNerBq9r42f0jwYXdgzs IlZnxHv6I8cJ3uWFfw4qqiewuVP95veW53IQ4= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=e0JyWU1vn5oGglCL3uIRpOFkV1NHnX7MQfiVSxBAwoY=; b=Nl090f4Dn1R3gRYloEQ8jA9zVxkk/0ZNsI8CH6OdR0cnS5QexFe3MxLEaoSC1/aMHy qjuyK7ZovrAQu+ih3iu16em/1QOWgYznRzkJRATnWq6gCskySnDhn+0ST/c/TgruB/nV iiR+0jgOdkPJ99wmdGFioyPREB7TcwL0gYeCUNBgyNGiGoo++QTvZDFaOUTygF5wjllp VgFS/cwsy6N4FD9MdWJrQwOil6KwVVvflCcgRymyJJSRHwDBDVOSc1YuRVMbFy0r2xZQ OmcvTpBftTumbBOgfU1lmPh5+/DTpxCY1VP8KZTqS3rc3ODHw98efWrMg8wGt4Vl13Ai 3Zhw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tDby7JfBT7sCEsA3j6SOMQYssNBGD0WPJmlK2H8R2P0t2klNhNX hhwnkZ7Xl2W09JlOxTHtfpNGRgF+QmQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx49gKO7kL58IrGHX9bGB/y62YiT9ME+OBiE+kBRgv56jQhuVyCtHNBdphgt2JSjptlgibI0Osw== X-Received: by 10.98.106.193 with SMTP id f184mr72184pfc.201.1523928048998; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 18:20:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SZX1000114654 ([45.56.152.120]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u4sm23397312pfh.120.2018.04.16.18.20.46 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 16 Apr 2018 18:20:48 -0700 (PDT) From: Guo Heyi X-Google-Original-From: Guo Heyi Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 09:20:44 +0800 To: Guo Heyi Cc: Ard Biesheuvel , Leif Lindholm , "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" , Michael D Kinney , Haojian Zhuang Message-ID: <20180417012044.GA123329@SZX1000114654> References: <1521594198-52523-1-git-send-email-heyi.guo@linaro.org> <20180328010531.GA69547@SZX1000114654> <20180329002050.GB97590@SZX1000114654> <20180331013747.GA106704@SZX1000114654> <20180413020553.GB119834@SZX1000114654> <20180416135709.GA122959@SZX1000114654> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180416135709.GA122959@SZX1000114654> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Subject: Re: [PATCH edk2-platforms 00/12] Hisilicon/D0x: Switch to generic PciHostBridge X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 01:20:49 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Hi Ard, I tested mm -io on D05, for root bridge 4 with CPU IO address starting from 0x8_abff0000, and it worked; both mm -io 0x8abff0000 and mm 0x8abff0000 provided the same output. It seems there is no other limit for 64bit IO address after you fixed the issue in EFI shell mm command. Thanks and regards, Heyi On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 09:57:09PM +0800, Guo Heyi wrote: > Thanks, I will test mm command and let you know the result. > > Regards, > > Heyi > > On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 09:19:53AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > On 13 April 2018 at 04:05, Guo Heyi wrote: > > > Hi Ard, > > > > > > Any comments? > > > > > > > Apologies for the delay. I have been travelling and am behind on email. > > > > > Anyway we can modify the code if you insist on using an intermediate CPU IO > > > address space. > > > > > > > I have not made up my mind yet, to be honest. I agree there is a > > certain elegance to merging both translations, but I am concerned that > > existing EDK2 code may deal poorly with I/O addresses that require > > more than 32 bits to express. > > > > Did you try the mm command in the shell for instance? As you know, I > > recently removed an artificial address range limit there, but I wonder > > if it uses 64-bit variables for I/O ports.