| To: | Matthew Dharm <mdharm@momenco.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: set_io_port_base()? |
| From: | Ralf Baechle <ralf@oss.sgi.com> |
| Date: | Thu, 21 Feb 2002 03:13:38 +0100 |
| Cc: | Linux-MIPS <linux-mips@oss.sgi.com> |
| In-reply-to: | <NEBBLJGMNKKEEMNLHGAIEEKDCFAA.mdharm@momenco.com>; from mdharm@momenco.com on Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 06:05:21PM -0800 |
| References: | <20020221025755.B29466@dea.linux-mips.net> <NEBBLJGMNKKEEMNLHGAIEEKDCFAA.mdharm@momenco.com> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.2.5i |
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 06:05:21PM -0800, Matthew Dharm wrote: > If it works as I think it does, then is the code in > linux/arch/mips/gt64120/momenco_ocelot/setup.c correct? Specifically, > it calls ioremap() and then calls set_io_port_base() with a very > strange value -- it's the value from ioremap() > modified by the I/O physical address base... ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I was reading too fast and missed that part. > That doesn't look right to me... or I just don't quite understand how > this is supposed to work. That's definately looks fishy. Another crime people keep comitting is using the same address space for both I/O memory and the base address of the port space. Ralf |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | RE: set_io_port_base()?, Matthew Dharm |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: set_io_port_base()?, Ralf Baechle |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: set_io_port_base()?, Matthew Dharm |
| Next by Thread: | Re: set_io_port_base()?, Jun Sun |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |