[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ Re: [Linux-mips-kernel]ioremap & ISA]

Subject: Re: [ Re: [Linux-mips-kernel]ioremap & ISA]
From: hanishkvc <>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 12:03:16 +0800
Cc: Ralf Baechle <>,
References: <> <> <>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.5) Gecko/20011012
Hi Jim,

If a device or a bus/Interface controller has some memory, then its up to the corresponding driver to make it available to the system. So yes If I am not wrong you should use ioremap to make this memory visible somewhere in the kernel address space. Inturn doing read/write on it should succeed.

I don't get the reason has to why u want to use isa_slot_offset. As you know the physical address range for ur interface/bus(and devices) you use that value in ioremap. This would give u a new virtual address which inturn you should/would use in your read/write calls.

However has I haven't worked on PCMCIA logic of linux, I may be wrong, if they have some of their own conventions interms has to where they map the memory and or what standard function/macro names they use.

Keep :-)

Jim Paris wrote:

My system (Vadem Clio 1000, vr4111) has a VG-469 (i82365) PCMCIA
controller with IO port space at 0x14000000, and IO memory space
at 0x10000000.

3) it can use check/request/release_mem_region on I/O memory
- this fails, because the iomem resource map contains the kernel:
  > -more /proc/iomem
  00000000-00ffffff : System Ram
    00002000-001bc6af : Kernel code
    001cf300-00299fff : Kernel data
(this seems very wrong to me, since the kernel is most definately
 not in the I/O memory space; real memory, of course, but I/O memory??)
4) it can use ioremap, and then read[bwl] and write[bwl] with the result
- this fails with the current ioremap; neither ioremap nor read/write[bwl]
  take isa_slot_offset into account

Am I misunderstanding how this stuff is supposed to work?  Is the
i82365 driver doing anything wrong?

(The i82365 driver also makes the incorrect assumption that PCMCIA IRQs
directly correspond to system IRQs, but this is definately a problem
with the driver and I've fixed that.)


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