From owner-freebsd-firewire@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 19 17:08:06 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-firewire@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5350A16A4BF for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 17:08:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from is1.mh.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp (is1.mh.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp [133.11.205.11]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09A9143F85 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 17:08:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from simokawa@sat.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp) Received: from is1.mh.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp (is1.mh.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp [127.0.0.1]) by is1.mh.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03E16218164 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2003 09:08:03 +0900 (JST) Received: from mailhosting.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp (IDENT:mirapoint@mailhosting.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp [133.11.205.3]) h7K082IJ000447; Wed, 20 Aug 2003 09:08:02 +0900 Received: from ett.sat.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp (ett.sat.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp [133.11.135.3])3.3.5-GR) with ESMTP id AJT58874; Wed, 20 Aug 2003 09:08:02 +0900 (JST) Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 09:08:02 +0900 Message-ID: From: Hidetoshi Shimokawa To: Katsushi Kobayashi In-Reply-To: <1236D9B7-D266-11D7-B5E4-000393D603A4@koganei.wide.ad.jp> References: <1236D9B7-D266-11D7-B5E4-000393D603A4@koganei.wide.ad.jp> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.11.0 (Wonderwall) REMI/1.14.3 (Matsudai) FLIM/1.14.3 (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Unebigory=F2mae?=) APEL/10.3 MULE XEmacs/21.4 (patch 8) (Honest Recruiter) (i386--freebsd) X-Face: OE([KxWyJI0r[R~S/>7ia}SJ)i%a,$-9%7{*yihQk|]gl}2p#"oXmX/fT}Bn7: #j7i14gu$jgR\S*&C3R/pJX List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2003 00:08:06 -0000 At Wed, 20 Aug 2003 01:56:26 +0900, Katsushi Kobayashi wrote: > > What chipset is your target ? > > I am not sure whether OHCI2.0 is ready or not. > > For example, TI's 1394b link layer controller (TSB82AA2) has some > special > registers the extension of OHCI1.1. TI called it as OHCI1.1+. > > Thanks, Yes, the target is TSB82AA2. The OHCI1.2 is listed as reference in its datasheet(1.3 Related Documents). It seems that there are some extenstions(*1) in stream packet format in OHCI1.1+/1.2 rather than registers. As you know, OHCI packet format is somewhat different from 1394 packet format. Do you have any information about difference between 1.1 and 1.1+ or 1.2? (*) I observed some strange behavior if we don't fill reserved field with zero. > > On 2003.Aug.20, at 12:37 AM, Hidetoshi Shimokawa wrote: > > > Does anyone know where I can get the 1394 OHCI 1.2 specification? > > > > 1394b chips seems to use some fields reserved in OHCI1.1. > > /\ Hidetoshi Shimokawa \/ simokawa@sat.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp PGP public key: http://www.sat.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~simokawa/pgp.html