Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 20 May 1997 09:51:29 -0700 (MST)
From:      Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
To:        msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au (Michael Smith)
Cc:        dfr@nlsystems.com, se@FreeBSD.ORG, msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Backwards compatibiliy for isa_driver
Message-ID:  <199705201651.JAA01507@phaeton.artisoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <199705201317.WAA02812@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> from "Michael Smith" at May 20, 97 10:47:07 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > If I remember correctly, ISA port addresses are not fully
> > > decoded on many cards, and thus we have to expect a card
> > > to be visible multiple times in the address space. There
> > > should be a way to encode the address range. (I'm using a
> > > ln2range struct element for this purpose in the PCI code.)
> > 
> > Ohhh.  Thats nasty.  Does this mean that reserving a port range for those
> > cards will also have to reserve all the address where the ports are
> > visible?
> 
> It means that "ISA" instances of a device can only be expected in the
> range 0x100-0x400, but that if the motherboard chipset is broken or
> old, probes at higher multiples of the device's address may still show
> it up.  This is not normally a problem, as you only go above there for
> EISA/PCI devices.

This is not a motherboard problem.  This is a card line decoding problem.

And yes, many, many modem cards and older 8/16 bit ethernet cards have
this flaw.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199705201651.JAA01507>