On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 03:13:01PM +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > > I think historically we had something like chkslot() first in the code > > for the Galileo/Marvell bridges where it's needed due the brainddead > > abuse of device 31 - any access to that will crash the system. From that > > point on chkslot checking spread across the PCI code like the measles in > > a kindergarden. > > Does the Galileo/Marvell do anything else with the device #31 than what > is recommended by the PCI spec as a way to issue special cycles? We need > to be careful about the device #31 in general; it is seldom used anyway as > there are only 20 IDSEL lines defined by the standard and they are usually > mapped starting from the device #0. It's documented somewhere in their specs. Whatever, it ends crashing the system so device 31 is hands off. Ralf
