From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 18 22:37:25 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95C2E16A4CE; Fri, 18 Feb 2005 22:37:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.village.org [168.103.84.182]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27AAD43D45; Fri, 18 Feb 2005 22:37:25 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by harmony.village.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j1IMZ9qR049670; Fri, 18 Feb 2005 15:35:09 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 15:35:09 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <20050218.153509.85367062.imp@bsdimp.com> To: ticso@cicely.de, ticso@cicely12.cicely.de From: Warner Losh In-Reply-To: <20050218214654.GD14312@cicely12.cicely.de> References: <200502181735.j1IHZ3Ch032038@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050218214654.GD14312@cicely12.cicely.de> X-Mailer: Mew version 3.3 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org cc: src-committers@freebsd.org cc: cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/pci pci_pci.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 22:37:25 -0000 From: Bernd Walter 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