From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 In-Reply-To: <199908100538.HAA00316@piglet.cpu.lu> Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1999 10:45:03 +0200 To: mlan@cpu.lu, linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: Trying a Promise Ultra/66 on powerpc Message-Id: <19990810104503.021289@mail.mipsys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: On Tue, Aug 10, 1999, Michel Lanners wrote: >Exactly what I meant. I feel drivers shouldn't read addresses directly >from config space, but rather from the pci_dev struct, so that any >necessary pcibios_fixup() can be made. By the way, the same is true for >interrupts.... I fully agree with that, except that we should keep a way for a driver to know which offset to apply, in case it really needs to go thru config space hacks. (There are some exceptional cases where devices are incorrectly mapped). I beleive we should fixup this way both io addresses and interrupt numbers. OF dev tree is great, but we should keep things coherent with other archs, especially for generic PCI drivers. Finally, the pci subsystem could export a couple of function to re-allocate an i/o or memory range on a given bus (and return the appropriate offset) for the few drivers that need to hack with their original mappings. -- Perso. e-mail: Work e-mail: BenH. Web : [[ 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. ]]