linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Alexandros Kostopoulos" <akostop@inaccessnetworks.com>
To: "Scott Wood" <scottwood@freescale.com>,
	"Alexandros Kostopoulos" <akostop@inaccessnetworks.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: pci in arch/powerpc vs arch/ppc
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 19:46:05 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <twig.1186602365.9125@inaccessnetworks.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46BA1560.7090703@freescale.com>

Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com> said:

> Alexandros Kostopoulos wrote:
> > I've noticed the following: In function pci_process_bridge_OF_ranges, 
> > when  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 space  (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 = ranges[na+2] for I/O as well?
> 
> Ideally, yes -- but currently IO-space resources are relative to the 
> start of the primary bus's IO-space.
> 
> As a workaround, try not setting the primary flag when calling 
> pci_process_bridge_OF_ranges.  Note that this means that any legacy I/O 
> ports that may exist on cards you plug in (such as VGA cards) will not 
> be found.
> 
> The proper solution is probably to refuse pre-existing BARs that are 
> lower than PCIBIOS_MIN_IO, and/or provide a flag to tell the PCI layer 
> to completely ignore pre-existing BARs.

I was referring to the allocation of primary bus' IO space based on the 
device tree. I understand that IO-space resources are relative to the start 
of the primary bus' IO space. But I think the primary bus IO space allocation 
itself is broken. Let me explain with an example:

In mpc8272ads.dts, the ranges property for pci is:

ranges = <42000000 0 80000000 80000000 0 20000000
          02000000 0 a0000000 a0000000 0 20000000
          01000000 0 00000000 f6000000 0 02000000>;

The third obviously corresponds to IO space. So, shouldn't the res->start for 
the host bridge be set to f6000000 ? Because, currently, based on what I've 
described in my previous mail, it gets set to 0. It seems to me like a matter 
of incorrect parsing of the device tree from pci_process_bridge_OF_ranges() 
for IO space. Or am I missing something else here, and it should actually be 
0?

thanks

Alex

> 
> -Scott
> 



-- 

  reply	other threads:[~2007-08-08 19:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-08-03 14:58 pci in arch/powerpc vs arch/ppc Alexandros Kostopoulos
2007-08-03 20:10 ` Scott Wood
2007-08-04 16:39   ` Kumar Gala
2007-08-07  9:06     ` Alexandros Kostopoulos
2007-08-07 15:20       ` Scott Wood
2007-08-08 11:42         ` Alexandros Kostopoulos
2007-08-08 13:03           ` Alexandros Kostopoulos
2007-08-08 16:24             ` Scott Wood
2007-08-08 14:21           ` Alexandros Kostopoulos
2007-08-08 19:11             ` Scott Wood
2007-08-08 19:46               ` Alexandros Kostopoulos [this message]
2007-08-08 19:56                 ` Scott Wood
2007-08-08 22:20                   ` Alexandros Kostopoulos
2007-08-09 15:04                     ` Scott Wood
2007-08-09 15:56                       ` Segher Boessenkool
2007-08-11 23:28                         ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-08-10  4:32                 ` Paul Mackerras
2007-08-08 22:55             ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-08-08 16:29           ` MPC8260 PCI9 erratum Scott Wood

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=twig.1186602365.9125@inaccessnetworks.com \
    --to=akostop@inaccessnetworks.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
    --cc=scottwood@freescale.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).