From owner-freebsd-mobile Sat Apr 10 0:21:45 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org Received: from moss.nibb.ac.jp (moss.nibb.ac.jp [133.48.46.64]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 261E114D51 for ; Sat, 10 Apr 1999 00:21:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tomoaki@biol.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by moss.nibb.ac.jp (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA06015; Sat, 10 Apr 1999 16:17:37 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from tomoaki@biol.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp) To: mike@smith.net.au Cc: y-nakaga@nwsl.mesh.ad.jp, dcs@newsguy.com, nate@mt.sri.com, faber@ISI.EDU, nsayer@quack.kfu.com, freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: tomoaki@biol.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp Subject: Re: Any success with CirrusLogic 6729/6730??? From: Tomoaki NISHIYAMA In-Reply-To: <199904092243.PAA00954@dingo.cdrom.com> References: <199904092243.PAA00954@dingo.cdrom.com> <199904090913.SAA03116@chandra.eatell.msr.prug.or.jp> X-Mailer: Mew version 1.94b8 on Emacs 19.34 / Mule 2.3 (SUETSUMUHANA) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19990410161736W.tomoaki@moss.nibb.ac.jp> Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 16:17:36 +0900 X-Dispatcher: imput version 990212(IM106) Lines: 38 Sender: owner-freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org From: Mike Smith Subject: Re: Any success with CirrusLogic 6729/6730??? Date: Fri, 09 Apr 1999 15:43:33 -0700 Message-ID: <199904092243.PAA00954@dingo.cdrom.com> mike> By definition, an ISA PCIC is an ISA device. But a PCI PCIC is not an mike> ISA device, even though it is logically identical. Newconfig people did not say PCI PCIC should be treated as ISA device, but they said that ISA PCIC and PCI PCIC in compatibility mode should be treated as ISA device, and that PCI PCIC in native mode should be treated as PCI device. mike> My point is that it is not useful to treat the PCIC as an ISA device. mike> It should be treated as a bus bridge. A bus bridge(PCIC) between ISA and PCMCIA is an ISA device. A bus bridge connected to PCI is a PCI device. They did not deny to treat PCIC as a bus bridge, but said that a bus bridge is a device in itself. mike> A SCSI pccard may give a bus hierarchy of nexus/PCI/PCCARD/SCSI if the mike> PCIC is on the PCI bus, or nexus/ISA/PCCARD/SCSI if it is an ISA mike> device. We need to treat these accordingly, and in the first case it mike> is _not_ valid to consider the PCIC as "an ISA device". If the pcic is in compatibility mode, then the PCIC should be treated as ISA device, because it works as if it were nexus/ISA/PCCARD/SCSI. If the pcic is in native mode then the PCIC is considered a PCI device. This is why the pcic code is to be separated into three parts as Nakagawa said. y-nakaga> - Separate PCIC code into three parts: ISA frontend, PCI y-nakaga> frontend and bus independent backend. -------- Tomoaki Nishiyama e-mail:tomoaki@biol.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp Department of Biological Sciences, Graduate School of Science, The University of Tokyo To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-mobile" in the body of the message