From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 3 12:17:19 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20F5D16A4CE for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 12:17:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.bsdimp.com [204.144.255.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95F7B43D41 for ; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 12:17:17 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from localhost (warner@rover2.village.org [10.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i13KHFHT087664; Tue, 3 Feb 2004 13:17:15 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 13:16:41 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <20040203.131641.26968129.imp@bsdimp.com> To: nate@root.org From: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <20040203111312.Q32201@root.org> References: <20040127.032119.28084825.imp@bsdimp.com> <20040203111312.Q32201@root.org> 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: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: newbus ioport usage X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 20:17:19 -0000 [[ I'll draft a longer reply this evening ]] In message: <20040203111312.Q32201@root.org> Nate Lawson writes: : 1. Do I have to do all the bus_set_handle gyrations found in nexus? I think so. I'd have to look at the code. You may be able to copy the bus_handle from the BUS_ALLOC_RESOURCE resource. : I : thought that they could be dispensed with since nexus should do all those : when acpi0 allocates resources from it with BUS_ALLOC_RESOURCE. It all depends on the details (eg, I'd have to look at the code you are writing). : I can : certainly leave out the PC98 ifdefs since I'm relatively certain there are : no PC98 ACPI machines, right? There never was or will be a ACPI implementation for pc98. : In the future, I'll make two passes, first to detect system resource : objects (PNP0C01 and PNP0C02) and reserve resources and the second to : actually probe acpi devices. I'd rather wait for newbus to do this : multi-pass approach than attempt it myself with hacks to try to localize : it. Yes. We need a better discovery phase followed by an attach phase. I don't know if this is a newbus API change yet or not. I can see it being done with most of the APIs that are in place now, but a few tweaks might be in order. Warner