On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 10:32:15PM +1100, Timothy S. Nelson wrote: > On Mon, 8 Dec 2008, Alex Villac??s Lasso wrote: > >> The SATA ROM example is from my work machine, where the SATA hard disk is >> already a boot device. Why is this not a proper example of the PCI ROM >> reading failure? > > I think he's saying that he thinks both are failures, but that they have > different causes, or possibly that getting a secondary VGA card working can > be done in a way that doesn't work for other devices. I could be wrong, > but that's how I interpret what I read. Yes, that's almost what I meant. I meant getting a secondard VGA card working has additional issues that SATA cards won't have. The SATA Expansion ROM issue might happen to be the same thing but I wouldn't assume that. VGA is "special" (as in horribly crippled by historical precedent). SATA is not. Additional "MMIO routing" magic happens for VGA devices in the PCI Host bus controllers and PCI-PCI Bridges. ISTR the BIOS also needs to be at a fixed location. If I've got that right, given a "fixed location" would mean only one VGA device can have it's Expansion ROM enabled at a time. Can someone with x86 VGA routing experience confirm? Bjorn Helgaas? hth, grant -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
