Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 31 Jan 1999 22:58:54 +0100 (MET) | From | Gerard Roudier <> | Subject | Re: kmalloc |
| |
On Fri, 29 Jan 1999, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
[ ... ]
> > A PCI device driver want to tell the kernel: > > > > - Give me some MMIO handle to access this configured PCI BUS address range > > on that PCI BUS, but I donnot care of how you will proceed for it. > > > > Instead of that, you tell the driver: > > > > - Provide ioremap() with some right-cooked address value supplied in the > > pcidev structure and you will get some address-typed value to access the > > device. > > Perhaps, but do not forget the needs of some lesser known programs like > Xservers too, or propose a new interface for programs who need the > equivalent of mmap on /dev/mem. And anyway the cooked value is the > physical address on the processor pins as Martin repeated, it's not that > artificial and it's the lesser evil we have to live with for 2.2.
Hi Gabriel,
I didn't write that I didn't want MMIO regions to be memory-mapped from user space, nor I forget this need, and I will probably _never_ write that. It is its memory-like based design that makes PCI so simple and pleasant. I already wrote about what I think about hardwares that do not have a unified memory addressing for all BUSES and host memory that break the simplicity of PCI and introduced the complexity with addressing we have to deal with.
I was only speaking about the base_addresses provided by the pci_dev structure that has been presented as some input parameters for ioremap() and told that this is _not_, in my opinion, what a PCI device driver expects as kernel service, or at least _not_ enough.
I like oranges and apples as well, but dislike any mix of both, btw.
Regards, Gérard.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |