| To: | Jun Sun <jsun@mvista.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: set_io_port_base()? |
| From: | Ralf Baechle <ralf@oss.sgi.com> |
| Date: | Thu, 21 Feb 2002 04:30:33 +0100 |
| Cc: | Matthew Dharm <mdharm@momenco.com>, Linux-MIPS <linux-mips@oss.sgi.com> |
| In-reply-to: | <3C745B0B.84203D3F@mvista.com>; from jsun@mvista.com on Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 06:27:23PM -0800 |
| References: | <20020221025755.B29466@dea.linux-mips.net> <NEBBLJGMNKKEEMNLHGAIEEKDCFAA.mdharm@momenco.com> <20020221031338.A31129@dea.linux-mips.net> <3C745B0B.84203D3F@mvista.com> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.2.5i |
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 06:27:23PM -0800, Jun Sun wrote: > This is actually right. This way if you pass an virtual at > (mips_io_port_base + delta), you will get a physical address > (GT_PCI_IO_BASE + delta), the desired place. > > Most boards don't need this funky ioremap() and base addr substraction trick, > but ocelot has the IO address placed beyond normal kseg1 addressing range. If you ever think about the value of the the address you're making something wrong ... Ralf |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | RE: set_io_port_base()?, Jason Gunthorpe |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: set_io_port_base()?, Jun Sun |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: set_io_port_base()?, Jun Sun |
| Next by Thread: | pthread support in mipsel-linux, Wayne Gowcher |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |