Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 15:35:09 -0700 (MST) From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: ticso@cicely.de, ticso@cicely12.cicely.de Cc: cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/pci pci_pci.c Message-ID: <20050218.153509.85367062.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <20050218214654.GD14312@cicely12.cicely.de> References: <200502181735.j1IHZ3Ch032038@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050218214654.GD14312@cicely12.cicely.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
From: Bernd Walter <ticso@cicely12.cicely.de> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/pci pci_pci.c Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 22:46:55 +0100 > On Fri, Feb 18, 2005 at 05:35:03PM +0000, Warner Losh wrote: > > imp 2005-02-18 17:35:03 UTC > > > > FreeBSD src repository > > > > Modified files: > > sys/dev/pci pci_pci.c > > Log: > > For the I/O port case, we need to set ok to 1 if we have what looks > > like a valid range. We already do this in the memory case (although > > the code there is somewhat different than the I/o case because we have > > to deal with different kinds of memory). Since most laptops don't > > have non-subtractive bridges, this wasn't seen in practice. > > Does that mean we do check ranges on pci bridges? Yes. And we have been for a long time. > I can remember having troubles with alpha systems where io ranges in > PCI chips behind PCI-PCI bridges looked valid by themself, but in fact > no IO range is configured on bridges. Yes. And we've been dealing with the newer subtractively decoded bridges for a long time as well too :-) long time == since before 5.3 :-) Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050218.153509.85367062.imp>