Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 20:34:39 +0100 (CET) From: Blaz Zupan <blaz@amis.net> To: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: pccard not working on 4.0-RELEASE Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0003152031550.9627-100000@titanic.medinet.si> In-Reply-To: <200003151923.MAA88694@harmony.village.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> The old code wouldn't even look at the second pcic entry. It will > just blindly probe at both 3e0 and 3e2 and claim that it was really at > 3e0. It would try to share interupts between these two entries and > would generally not work at all on systems that had multiple pcic > cards in them (I have about 6 different pcic isa cards that play > better together now than before, but still not to the level I'd call > working). I just tried the way it was specified in LINT: device pcic0 at isa? It does not work. So the only way it works for me is: device pcic0 at isa? port 0x3e2 iomem 0xd0000 Great, I'm a happy camper again :) > I did have some code in place to try to search out the pcic devices, > but it made it impossible to specify the management irq for those > devices so I've never committed it. I'm wondering, why use the management irq at all? Is polling in this situation really so bad? It really shouldn't matter much if the system detects the card removal right away or half a second later, does it? Blaz Zupan, blaz@amis.net, http://home.amis.net/blaz/ Medinet d.o.o., Linhartova 21, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0003152031550.9627-100000>