From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <felix@embedded-sol.com>
Received: from vega.surpasshosting.com (vega.surpasshosting.com [72.29.83.9])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client did not present a certificate)
	by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 93899B7C68
	for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 22:02:44 +1100 (EST)
Message-ID: <4B4C56D5.6020008@embedded-sol.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 13:02:45 +0200
From: Felix Radensky <felix@embedded-sol.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: PCI-PCI bridge scanning broken on 460EX
References: <4B388D9D.7010404@embedded-sol.com>	<1262584539.2173.335.camel@pasglop>	<4B41ADF1.1000400@embedded-sol.com>	<4B49CE8A.7000609@embedded-sol.com>	<1263155906.724.2.camel@pasglop>	<4B4A4307.5050704@embedded-sol.com>	<1263159117.724.15.camel@pasglop>	<4CD35CD1F8085945B597F80EEC89421303B8AD0C@exc01.bk.prodrive.nl>	<4B4B1027.4020708@embedded-sol.com>
	<4B4B55CF.9000707@embedded-sol.com>	<1263243199.724.146.camel@pasglop>
	<4B4BAAC0.4010300@embedded-sol.com>
	<1263250414.724.161.camel@pasglop>
In-Reply-To: <1263250414.724.161.camel@pasglop>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Cc: Stef van Os <stef.van.os@Prodrive.nl>, Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de>,
	Feng Kan <fkan@amcc.com>, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

Hi Ben

Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-01-12 at 00:48 +0200, Felix Radensky wrote:
>   
>> Maybe because the bus behind root P2P bridge is bus 0, and type 1
>> cycles are
>> needed for bus numbers greater than 0. That's what 460EX manual says.
>>     
>
> Well, no... the bus behind the root P2P is bus 1 ... the root P2P itself
> is on bus 0... but then, it's some trick in the way they implemented it
> I suppose.
>
>   
>> You are correct, the log is from older version, without Stef's fix. I 
>> don't have access to a
>> system with devices behind PLX, and the guy who did the testing used 
>> wrong kernel.
>> I'll make sure he uses the correct one and get back to you. Maybe 
>> everything works after all :)
>> I'm really sorry for confusion.
>>     
>
> No worries :-) Feel free to send a proper patch to fix that problem
> upstream too !
>
>   
The kernel with Stef's fix works fine, and recognizes both PLX and 
device behind it.
Stef,  do want to provide a patch for upstream kernel, or do you want me 
to do that on
your behalf ?

Thanks a lot everyone for you help !

Felix.
Felix.