Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 10:20:02 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-arm <freebsd-arm@freebsd.org>, Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: option NEW_PCIB Message-ID: <51AC226F-7516-48EA-BC9D-B67F6508BCBF@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <201403100945.20298.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <1394200335.1149.370.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <58AB4C66-4267-414D-80D4-B97FF86A94A5@bsdimp.com> <201403100945.20298.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:45 AM, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Friday, March 07, 2014 9:38:33 am Warner Losh wrote: >>=20 >> On Mar 7, 2014, at 6:52 AM, Ian Lepore <ian@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >>=20 >>> Every architecture has "option NEW_PCIB" in its conf/DEFAULTS except = arm >>> and mips. Is that on purpose? What are the implications of adding = it? >>> Or maybe more importantly, what are the implications of it not being >>> there? >>=20 >> This is John Baldwin=92s option for his reworked PCI bridge code. He = did that as >> a fallback in case he really messed up something. It introduces = renumbering >> of busses that don=92t already have numbers assigned. It should be = enabled on >> ARM, but the required resource isn=92t defined on arm, and some of = the other >> required glue doesn=92t seem to be implemented for arm yet, which is = why things >> are the way they are at the moment. I think John intends for the = option to go >> away, and everything it covers will be =91standard=92. >=20 > Yes. I just added a page on the wiki about NEW_PCIB explaining the = changes > each platform needs for it in a bit more detail on Friday: >=20 > https://wiki.freebsd.org/NEW_PCIB >=20 > I have posted patches in the past to arm@ to handle step 2 in the = NEW_PCIB > base requirements for arm@ but haven't been able to get folks to test = them. > I just recently made a new pass through sys/arm in a p4 tree to = refresh this. > I haven't even compiled these yet, but you can find the patch here: >=20 > http://people.freebsd.org/~jhb/patches/arm_activate2.patch I=92ll take a look=85 Thanks for putting these together... > I don't know how best to think about fixing i80321_pci to work with = NEW_PCIB. > It has some hack that I don't fully understand. I think it uses an > alternate mapping of the same resource range to use a different base = address > for the mapping. Longer term I think the bus_map_resource() think I = suggest > at the bottom is how to handle that, but even then there would still = need to > be a way to know which base address a given resource wanted to use. = It may > be that we need to implement that differently (bus-specific rman = flag?) While I=92m not normally a big fan of retiring code, I think in this = case it may be easier to just retire the i80321 support. It is really old, released in 2002. = There=92s not too many boards that had this on it, and I think all the ones that ever ran = FreeBSD are in cognet@=91s lab. On the whole, it is yet another machine to update that slows down = any modernization processes we have... Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?51AC226F-7516-48EA-BC9D-B67F6508BCBF>