Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 19:35:26 -0500 From: Coleman Kane <zombyfork@gmail.com> To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: PC Card subpart to R3000 thread Message-ID: <346a802205021816354ebbd91e@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20050218.131311.104079154.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <20050218.102310.74705720.imp@bsdimp.com> <200502181249.53139.jkim@niksun.com> <346a8022050218113126c1af5f@mail.gmail.com> <20050218.131311.104079154.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 13:13:11 -0700 (MST), Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: > > There are a number of issues relating to it, which makes it hard to > solve generically (well, one could always write 255 as the subbus > number, but that has some rather severe performance implications... > > Warner > How do we keep track of the busses now? What considerations must be taken into account regarding setting the numbering this subordinate bus number? In the patch code it seems that it is setting this register to the same value as the bus number (10). You are stating that it can be set to any number (PCIR_SUBBUS_1 that is)? -- coleman
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?346a802205021816354ebbd91e>