Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 17 May 2003 02:36:31 +0000
From:      Anthony Naggs <tony@ubik.demon.co.uk>
To:        "Jesse D. Guardiani" <jesse@wingnet.net>
Cc:        freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: IEEE 1394 (firewire) support
Message-ID:  <ALyzoiAvAax%2BIwxU@ubik.demon.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <ba3j7d$vmt$1@main.gmane.org>
References:  <ba3ek6$a9i$1@main.gmane.org> <20030516153211.W24315@12-221-88-80.client.insightBB.com> <ba3j7d$vmt$1@main.gmane.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <ba3j7d$vmt$1@main.gmane.org>, Jesse D. Guardiani
<jesse@wingnet.net> writes
>
>
>Well that is certainly good news. I suppose this means that the
>firewire standard isn't chipset dependant like bluetooth and
>802.11 then eh? I guess "firewire" includes the internal hardware
>interface also.

In a similar vein to the UHCI, OHCI & EHCI standards for USB host
controllers there is also an OHCI (Open Host Controller Interface)
standard for Firewire host controllers.  As far as I know all vendors
now follow this. Aside from minor quirks this should make things pretty
straightforward.  (OHCI USB & OHCI Firewire standards are very
different, don't be misled by the similar names.)

Be aware that old Firewire controller chips may have a vendor
proprietary interface.  This should only affect adapter cards.  Firewire
on the motherboard is recent enough that all systems should be OHCI
compatible.


Tony



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ALyzoiAvAax%2BIwxU>