From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <40E5E99B.2060006@mvista.com> Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2004 16:02:51 -0700 From: "Mark A. Greer" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Woodhouse Cc: linux-emb Subject: Re: mv6360 support in mv64x60.c (was Re: GT64260_eth (Ethernet) Driver) References: <40E1E94B.9060204@mvista.com> <1088691201.14216.2977.camel@hades.cambridge.redhat.com> <40E4618A.902@mvista.com> <1088777061.14216.4449.camel@hades.cambridge.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <1088777061.14216.4449.camel@hades.cambridge.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: David Woodhouse wrote: >On Thu, 2004-07-01 at 12:10 -0700, Mark A. Greer wrote: > > >>FYI, look at the "PCI P2P Configuration" register >>(MV64x60_PCI[01]_P2P_CONFIG (0x1d14/0x1d94)). Apparently your firmware >>sets the device number of your hoses to 3 for some reason (default is 0 >>for PCI, 0x1f for PCI-X). >> >> > >Aha -- that's what I spent my last quarter of an hour at work yesterday >looking for in the documentation. Thanks. > >I made mv64x60_get_type() read the register in question and query the >correct device for ident. > k > >Here's what I have working at the moment -- sorry, it's a bit untidy >still but the weekend calls... :) > heh > >Don't look too hard at the board code yet; it's still a hacked up hybrid >of your ev64260 code and the timesys 2.4 port. > Okay, I skimmed it an saw what you did. I'll take a closer on Tues but 64x60 changes look okay (I'm assuming your gen550 & serial changes aren't meant to go into this tree). I just pushed an updated mpsc driver that works okay for me. Well...the first port does; the second port hangs the system but its good enough to allow me to work on my 64360 boards. I will fix the second port. Thanks for the patch & have a good weekend. Mark ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/