[Top] [All Lists]

Re: pci_iomap issues?

To: Mark Mason <>
Subject: Re: pci_iomap issues?
From: Scott Ashcroft <>
Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 17:45:59 +0000 (GMT)
Cc: Scott Ashcroft <>,
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024;; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=f8w8oUgJ1MajttCnuZg+zwt+IDANK9gKrn6VMmPuS8CAINAfP6yRf7peqX4SZ0VSpMw4L90BCx9eg3C1ZIPcaPe4Mc/DHS8fTFs2VqDTnf5xdTRkX3PihJyZk9z3K8CaVEhLVMr/kNurE7KoltvUYgT3V/AYH144yAk+dxJLyxY= ;
In-reply-to: <>
Original-recipient: rfc822;
--- Mark Mason <> wrote:
> Any system based on BCM1480s could have multiple pci
> busses (one PCI-X
> directly, and additional busses through HT/PCI-X
> bridges).  For the
> BCM91480B board, we had to turn on PCI_DOMAINS to
> get this to work
> correctly.

I understand that there are machines with multiple PCI
busses out there but comparing the ppc64 code with the
proposed mips patches I don't see much difference.
Are the ppc64 people just breaking multiple PCI bus
machines, did something happen in the generic PCI code
which fixed the issue or is there just a difference I
can't see?


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