[Top] [All Lists]


To: Matt Porter <>
Subject: Re: PATCH
From: Pete Popov <>
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 15:52:43 -0700
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <>, "" <>
In-reply-to: <>
Original-recipient: rfc822;
References: <1097428659.4627.10.camel@localhost.localdomain> <> <>
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (X11/20040803)
Matt Porter wrote:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2004 at 08:01:28PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:

On Sun, 10 Oct 2004, Pete Popov wrote:

Ralf, or anyone else, any suggestions on how to get a patch like the one
below accepted in 2.6? It's needed due to the 36 bit address of the
pcmcia controller on the Au1x CPUs.

Perhaps you can ask the PPC people? Book E PPC has 36-bit I/O as well.

FWIW, it's specifically PPC440 cores that have a 36-bit address space.
It should be noted that nobody has as of yet expressed public interest
in having PCMCIA working on PPC440. I just ran into a person with a
custom board last week interfacing a CF card that would need a similar
patch to handle ppc's phys_addr_t.

To answer Pete's original question, I would suggest posting the patch
to which is
where PCMCIA subsystem development conversations are taking place. It
might be good to cc: rmk since he's been the de facto PCMCIA

I'll try that, thanks. If more SOCs needed this feature, it might have been possible to get it accepted in 2.4 a long time ago. With the PPC440, now it's not only the Au1x that needs the patch.


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