From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from natnoddy.rzone.de (natnoddy.rzone.de [81.169.145.166]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D96467B36 for ; Sat, 11 Feb 2006 19:06:30 +1100 (EST) From: Stefan Roese To: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org Subject: Re: Yosemite/440EP 'issues' as a PCI target Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2006 09:06:05 +0100 References: <20060209003459.0ED30352564@atlas.denx.de> <200602101859.24830.sr@denx.de> <43ECD753.5000105@ovro.caltech.edu> In-Reply-To: <43ECD753.5000105@ovro.caltech.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <200602110906.05547.sr@denx.de> List-Id: Linux on Embedded PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi David, On Friday 10 February 2006 19:11, David Hawkins wrote: > > Just use newer host CPU's! ;-) > > Ah, the words of a true engineer :) > > Of course the project manager wouldn't appreciate me doing that. > > However, its not totally out of the question ... $50 per 21555 > and 20 per crate, thats $1000, about half the price of > a CPU. But of course, without the I20 unit on the 440EP, > I might need the 21555 anyway. Do you really need this I2O unit? You could easily create some message ringbuffers, one in the 440EP's SDRAM for the host-to-440 messages and one in the host-cpu SDRAM for the 440-to-host messages. This way, all messages will be transferred using pci writes. Best regards, Stefan