linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] Register PCI host bridge resource earlier

To: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Register PCI host bridge resource earlier
From: tsbogend@alpha.franken.de (Thomas Bogendoerfer)
Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2007 18:10:27 +0200
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <4619008D.1030803@ru.mvista.com>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <20070408112844.GA7553@alpha.franken.de> <4618DDF0.1020604@ru.mvista.com> <20070408131228.GA7819@alpha.franken.de> <4618ED95.6040304@ru.mvista.com> <20070408135244.GA8016@alpha.franken.de> <4619008D.1030803@ru.mvista.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
On Sun, Apr 08, 2007 at 06:47:41PM +0400, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
>    I'm just not seeing how using insert_resource() vs request_resource() 
>    for i8259 ports can be relevant here.

request_resource will fail, because the range is already taken by
sni_io_resource, while insert_region inserts the resource into 
sni_io_resource. The problem is that init_i8259 doesn't have the right
resource for doing the request_resource, if ioport_resource starting from
0x0000 is already taken by a PCI host bridge. I could probably write a
patch, which adds a parameter to init_i8259 for the resource, where the
request_resource is correct. No idea, whether this is worth the efford.

Opions ?

Thomas.

-- 
Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessary a
good idea.                                                [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>