From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 10:10:54 +1000 Message-Id: <199908100010.KAA19153@tango.anu.edu.au> From: Paul Mackerras To: mlan@cpu.lu CC: drow@false.org, mj@ucw.cz, linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org In-reply-to: <199908092023.WAA00328@piglet.cpu.lu> (message from Michel Lanners on Mon, 9 Aug 1999 22:23:25 +0200 (CEST)) Subject: Re: Trying a Promise Ultra/66 on powerpc Reply-to: Paul.Mackerras@cs.anu.edu.au References: <199908092023.WAA00328@piglet.cpu.lu> Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: Michel Lanners wrote: > I'd vote for making I/O ports a memory addresss like any other, and > making sure drivers get this address right. See my other post for > details.. The problem is, there are PCI device drivers which assume you can get an address in I/O space from a PCI device (either directly from the config-space base address registers or from the pci_dev struct) and then just do inb and outb on that port address. That's why inb/outb add _IO_BASE to the port number. One way might be to adjust the base addresses in all the pci_dev structs and then make sure all drivers use the address from the pci_dev struct rather than reading config space themselves. Paul. [[ This message was sent via the linuxppc-dev mailing list. Replies are ]] [[ not forced back to the list, so be sure to Cc linuxppc-dev if your ]] [[ reply is of general interest. Please check http://lists.linuxppc.org/ ]] [[ and http://www.linuxppc.org/ for useful information before posting. ]]