From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from inaccessnetworks.com (node3.inaccessnetworks.com [212.205.200.118]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B585DDE99 for ; Thu, 9 Aug 2007 00:21:16 +1000 (EST) Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2007 17:21:05 +0300 To: "Scott Wood" Subject: Re: pci in arch/powerpc vs arch/ppc From: "Alexandros Kostopoulos" Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=iso-8859-7 MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20070803201036.GA18229@ld0162-tx32.am.freescale.net> <46B88DAC.70005@freescale.com> Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi all, I've noticed the following: In function pci_process_bridge_OF_ranges, wh= en = parsing the ranges for MEM and I/O space, the res->start for mem is = correctly set to ranges[na+2], which is the cpu address in the ranges = property. However, in I/O related code, res->start is set to ranges[2], = = which is in the PCI address field of the ranges property (and in my case= = is 0, as is also for the mpc8272ads case as well). Thus, the res->start = of = the I/O of the bridge is 0, which leads to the first device with I/O spa= ce = (a davicom ethernet device) been also assigned a I/O region starting at = 0. = Finally, the dmfe (davicom ethernet driver over PCI) fails with "dmfe: I= /O = base is zero". So, is the implementation of pci_process_bridge_OF_ranges= = correct ? shouldn't res->start =3D ranges[na+2] for I/O as well? thank you Alex