On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 12:10:43 PM CET Gabriele Paoloni wrote: > > On Tuesday, November 8, 2016 11:47:09 AM CET zhichang.yuan wrote: > > > + /* > > > + * The first PCIBIOS_MIN_IO is reserved specifically for > > indirectIO. > > > + * It will separate indirectIO range from pci host bridge to > > > + * avoid the possible PIO conflict. > > > + * Set the indirectIO range directly here. > > > + */ > > > + lpcdev->io_ops.start = 0; > > > + lpcdev->io_ops.end = PCIBIOS_MIN_IO - 1; > > > + lpcdev->io_ops.devpara = lpcdev; > > > + lpcdev->io_ops.pfin = hisilpc_comm_in; > > > + lpcdev->io_ops.pfout = hisilpc_comm_out; > > > + lpcdev->io_ops.pfins = hisilpc_comm_ins; > > > + lpcdev->io_ops.pfouts = hisilpc_comm_outs; > > > > I have to look at patch 2 in more detail again, after missing a few > > review > > rounds. I'm still a bit skeptical about hardcoding a logical I/O port > > range here, and would hope that we can just go through the same > > assignment of logical port ranges that we have for PCI buses, > > decoupling > > the bus addresses from the linux-internal ones. > > The point here is that we want to avoid any conflict/overlap between > the LPC I/O space and the PCI I/O space. With the assignment above > we make sure that LPC never interfere with PCI I/O space. But we already abstract the PCI I/O space using dynamic registration. There is no need to hardcode the logical address for ISA, though I think we can hardcode the bus address to start at zero here. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
