From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3D62DDE42 for ; Sat, 6 Oct 2007 06:57:52 +1000 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20071005180553.GA32405@localhost.localdomain> References: <20071005174015.GA11016@localhost.localdomain> <20071005174642.GB32145@localhost.localdomain> <47067ADE.9060306@ru.mvista.com> <20071005180553.GA32405@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: From: Kumar Gala Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] [POWERPC] mpc8568mds.dts: fix PCI/PCIe nodes Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 15:58:00 -0500 To: avorontsov@ru.mvista.com Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Oct 5, 2007, at 1:05 PM, Anton Vorontsov wrote: > On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 09:56:46PM +0400, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: >> Hello. >> >> Anton Vorontsov wrote: >> >>> Commit 5bece127f0666996ca90772229e00332a34e516c tried to fix >>> PCI/PCIe nodes, but actually it broke them even harder. ;-) >> >> Of course. But shouldn't those be the subnoses of the "soc" >> type node? > > Nope. PCI's ranges = <>; isn't in the SOC address space. > > Valentine Barshak posted a patch titled "[RFC] [PATCH] PowerPC: Add > 64-bit > phys addr support to 32-bit pci" that started using > of_translate_address() > for ranges, and of_translate_address() will not work if PCI placed > in the > SOC node. Not sure if that patch applied or not, though. I'm confused, what's the actual issue with PCI that this patch addresses? - k