On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 14:16:39 +0000
Peter Horton <phorton@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Ralf Baechle wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 02:55:58PM +0900, Yoichi Yuasa wrote:
> >
> >> This patch has fixed IDE resources problem about Cobalt.
> >>
> >> pcibios_fixup_device_resources() changes non-movable resources.
> >> It cannot be changed if there is IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED in the resource flags.
> >
> > <Ralf> anemo: Have you seen Yoichi's patch?
> > <anemo> Ralf: yes, but I could not see why ... My impression is IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED and io_offset adjustment is irrerevant.
> > <Ralf> This whole fixup thing is really meant to handle machines where there is an offset between PCI bus addresses and CPU physical addresses.
> > <Ralf> And that exists regardless of IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED
> > <anemo> I thought so too. So I can not see why youichi's patch fix something.
> > <Ralf> This may be the explanation:
> > <Ralf> static struct pci_controller cobalt_pci_controller = {
> > <Ralf> .pci_ops = >64111_pci_ops,
> > <Ralf> .mem_resource = &cobalt_mem_resource,
> > <Ralf> .mem_offset = 0,
> > <Ralf> .io_resource = &cobalt_io_resource,
> > <Ralf> .io_offset = 0 - GT_DEF_PCI0_IO_BASE,
> > <Ralf> };
> > <Ralf> I think he should have io_offset = 0.
> >
> > Which is what other GT-64120 platforms are using, so I wonder why that is
> > different on Cobalt.
> >
>
> The GT-64111 passes the CPU addresses straight onto the PCI bus and does
> not remove the offset of the Galileo's PCI window in CPU space. This
> means the only PCI I/O addresses that can be supported are 0x1000.0000
> to 0x11ff.ffff, hence the negative 'io_offset'.
>
> I assume the GT-64120 remaps the PCI addresses somehow to remove the offset.
>
> P.
--
--
Sick of rip off UK rail fares ? Learn how to get far cheaper fares
http://zeniv.linux.org.uk/~alan/GTR/
