Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 11 Aug 2009 16:10:17 +0100 | From | Martyn Welch <> | Subject | Re: [patch 1/5] Staging: VME Framework for the Linux Kernel |
| |
Emilio G. Cota wrote: > Martyn Welch wrote: > >> Again: what part of the API I have defined forces the driver to know >> about the underlying bridge? >> > > Let me answer with another question, maybe we get to understand > each other this way: > > Could you please explain me what happens when 17 different drivers > want to control 17 different devices, each on a different slot, > same address modifier, only 1MB per device? Apply if necessary > to the tsi148 bridge. >
Not the same question, but I'd agree - that would probably break the current model I have proposed. *However*, providing a resource management layer as you have proposed above the basic resource management my API provides would resolve that without added complexity in the bridge drivers themselves.
> NB1. Any given driver knows nothing about the other devices > on the crate; each driver only knows about the address, am and > size of the mapping for the device it controls--user-space > provide this info on a per-driver basis. > Yes. I agree. > NB2. The mapping offsets configured through the cards' pins match > the information passed from user space to each of the cards. > > Yes. If I understand you correctly, your saying that management of the devices in the VME address space is a system configuration issue.
> Cheers, > E. > -- Martyn Welch MEng MPhil MIET (Principal Software Engineer) T:+44(0)1327322748 GE Fanuc Intelligent Platforms Ltd, |Registered in England and Wales Tove Valley Business Park, Towcester, |(3828642) at 100 Barbirolli Square, Northants, NN12 6PF, UK T:+44(0)1327359444 |Manchester,M2 3AB VAT:GB 927559189
| |