lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Nov]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch] alpha port 2.3.29pre3
On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, Richard Henderson wrote:

>If you havn't already, you'll soon get angry mail from DaveM
>about this, as this breaks Sparc. I of course tried for that
>very change when the code was first written.

Hmm, maybe we can let Sparc to work fine with the change applyed? The
thing I did looks like the natural thing to do. It's not a black magic
hack. So IMHO if possible Sparc should be made to work with these changes
applyed. Dave? Is it possible?

>> +/* The IO address space is larger than 0xffff */
>> +#define TSUNAMI_IO_SPACE (TSUNAMI_CONF(0) - TSUNAMI_IO(0))
>> +#define TSUNAMI_MEM_SPACE (_TSUNAMI_IACK_SC(0) - TSUNAMI_MEM(0))
>
>Why this change? The IO address space may _be_ larger than 64k, but

hose->io_space->start = TSUNAMI_IO(index) - TSUNAMI_IO_BIAS;
hose->io_space->end = hose->io_space->start + TSUNAMI_IO_SPACE;

Some device here wakeup (after SRM) with an _I/O_ base_address set at an
offset larger than 64k and so without telling the kernel that the iospace
of such bus is larger than 64k, the find_parent_resource breaks and we
can't reinitialize the device (and reinitializing if possible we'll put
the base address of the device in the first 64k). Please tell me if you
don't agree on this change. If you don't agree the
pdev_assign_unassigned_resources() stuff should be redesigned. Of course I
tried to do the smaller changes possible in the common code (and I just
broken Sparc...).

Andrea


-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:55    [W:0.030 / U:3.336 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site