Re: [PATCH 2.6] Altix updates

[Patrick Gefre <pfg@sgi.com>]

Christoph Hellwig wrote:

>On Thu, Jan 15, 2004 at 03:54:37PM -0600, Pat Gefre wrote:
>  
>
>>001-reorg.patch
>>002-reorg1.patch
>>    
>>
>
>The IS_IOADDR() stuff in the accesor funcs in pcibr_reg.c is completly
>bogus, please decide whether you want to pass a pointer to the pcibr_soft
>or bridge_t to it instead of doing second-guessing.
>
>  
>

Yes this probably looks a little odd. This was setup this way for TIO. 
The macro in the TIO code checks to see
if it is a 'soft' struct or bridge address AND what bridge type it is - 
accessing different registers depending
on TIO or not TIO (the 2 cases we have so far). We think this makes the 
register access functions pretty flexible/generic.

>Also while the pic.h changes look okay they will conflict with a patch
>I'm about to send that adds common headers for the bridge/xbow/xwidget
>register for mips and IA64.  Can you send me a version of pic.h with
>those changes and the big endian ifdefs back in so I can just incorporate
>the new version into my patch?
>
>  
>

OK - I'll look into getting this for you.

>Also are all those access you abstract away different in TIOCP?  If not
>please don't add the wrappers for them.
>  
>