Date: Sat, 13 Dec 1997 21:51:10 -0800 From: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com> To: Jun-ichiro itojun Itoh <itojun@itojun.org> Cc: gjp@erols.net (Gary Palmer), hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Beginning SPARC port Message-ID: <199712140551.VAA09724@rah.star-gate.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 14 Dec 1997 14:18:39 %2B0900." <16608.882076719@coconut.itojun.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The functions is already there:
old_irq = pci_conf_read(tag, PCI_INTERRUPT_REG);
pci_conf_write(tag, PCI_INTERRUPT_REG, BROOKTREE_IRQ);
And usually PCI devices have i/o mapped registers.
Amancio
>
> >> hardware I/O model is CPU specific. There are architectures
> >> that do not have inb/outb instruction, and maps I/O device control
> >> registers onto memory. I dunno how Sparc-with-PCI motherboard
> >> access pci registers, but I'm sure there has to be bunch of changes.
> >Right, but in that case you #define the inb/outb macros to be the
> >appropriate load/store instructions for the processor.
> >What I am trying to say is that while it may not be the Politically
> >Correct(TM) solution, it is not totally i386 bound either. Being
> >#defines, its a bit more flexible than you were making out.
>
> Yes, I agree with your idea, as the first step.
> In the future we should introduce some function like,
> pci_reg_write_byte(), for more platform-independency.
> Not all the implementers know about i386:-)
>
> itojun
>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199712140551.VAA09724>