From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3F220DE5C9 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2009 10:14:13 +1100 (EST) Subject: Re: [QUESTION] 440EPx with PCI to PCIe bridge error From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: "Steven A. Falco" In-Reply-To: <4963D989.6090909@harris.com> References: <496268E7.5090907@harris.com> <1231190318.14860.17.camel@pasglop> <49627D33.8030605@harris.com> <1231223634.14860.18.camel@pasglop> <4963C1DE.6020007@harris.com> <4963CF68.3040808@harris.com> <1231279340.14860.31.camel@pasglop> <4963D989.6090909@harris.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2009 10:13:43 +1100 Message-Id: <1231283623.14860.32.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: "linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org" , Wolfgang Denk List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , > I'm not sure if this should be changed in the mainline. This card works > out of the box when used with a generic x86 PC, but not when used with > a sequoia. But, maybe it's just me climbing the PPC learning curve. Nah, I think 256M is ridiculously small :-) I think the .dts for that board should be changed, there is plenty of physical address space available on those chips since it's using a 36-bit bus. Cheers, Ben.