From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sam.nabble.com (sam.nabble.com [216.139.236.26]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E27EE2C0085 for ; Thu, 30 May 2013 17:32:38 +1000 (EST) Received: from tom.nabble.com ([192.168.236.105]) by sam.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UhxLh-00072n-Au for linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org; Thu, 30 May 2013 00:32:37 -0700 Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 00:32:37 -0700 (PDT) From: wolfking To: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org Message-ID: <1369899157331-71783.post@n7.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: <51A6EA1D.7080100@windriver.com> References: <1369885321567-71775.post@n7.nabble.com> <51A6EA1D.7080100@windriver.com> Subject: Re: can't access PCIe card under sbc8548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , (continued) I traced the 8139too.c when it uses pci_iomap, the pci_iomap called the ioport_map. The difference between 8139 and my PCIe card lies in the "port" value : void __iomem *ioport_map(unsigned long port, unsigned int len) { return (void __iomem *) (port + _IO_BASE); } in 8139too.c, the "port" value is 0x1000; for my PCIe card, the "port" value is 0xfefff000. And the value is got from pci_resource_start. So you see, the 8139 case doesn't overflow, my PICe overflows when _IO_BASE's value is 0xfd7fd000. -- View this message in context: http://linuxppc.10917.n7.nabble.com/can-t-access-PCIe-card-under-sbc8548-tp71775p71783.html Sent from the linuxppc-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.