From owner-freebsd-mobile  Tue Nov  4 19:14:13 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-mobile>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id TAA03970
          for mobile-outgoing; Tue, 4 Nov 1997 19:14:13 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-mobile)
Received: from word.smith.net.au (ppp13.portal.net.au [202.12.71.113])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA03959
          for <freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org>; Tue, 4 Nov 1997 19:14:07 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from mike@word.smith.net.au)
Received: from word.smith.net.au (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by word.smith.net.au (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA00694;
	Wed, 5 Nov 1997 13:39:30 +1030 (CST)
Message-Id: <199711050309.NAA00694@word.smith.net.au>
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0zeta 7/24/97
To: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>
cc: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>, Warner Losh <imp@village.org>,
        freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Libretto 50 - US Version and PAO 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 04 Nov 1997 08:39:55 PDT."
             <199711041539.IAA13793@rocky.mt.sri.com> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 1997 13:39:28 +1030
From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>
Sender: owner-freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> > Nate; you're the last source of "the IRQ matters" evidence - can we 
> > reevaluate this when you're free to test your set?
> 
> Yep, it appears that I'm confused badly, and there may be something else
> on my box that is causing things to fail when I don't specificy the IRQ.
> But, it looks like I'm going to have to eat my words about requiring the
> IRQ to be the same as the CIS port.

I wouldn't put it that way; just that we're having to learn some real 
truths about the hardware here.

> On that note, does it mean that any of the other information used in the
> CIS tuples (besides the size) is relevant?  Couldn't we just determine
> the io size and map it anywhere then?  It would *sure* be nice if we
> could simplify the CIS tuple processing. :) ;)

Well, from my reading of things, yes; I can't actually see anything 
that the card itself could actually be using to determine where it's 
actually mapped.  It sounds like the configuration entries are 
basically junk there for the convenience of lazy DOS driver authors.

mike