From owner-freebsd-alpha Mon Jun 24 12:21:45 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-alpha@freebsd.org Received: from overcee.wemm.org (12-232-114-102.client.attbi.com [12.232.114.102]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 137AE37B403 for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2002 12:21:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wemm.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by overcee.wemm.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D220C380E; Mon, 24 Jun 2002 12:21:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: mjacob@feral.com Cc: Andrew Gallatin , "M. Warner Losh" , ticso@cicely.de, alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Wither the nexus driver? In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 12:21:43 -0700 From: Peter Wemm Message-Id: <20020624192143.D220C380E@overcee.wemm.org> Sender: owner-freebsd-alpha@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Matthew Jacob wrote: > > note that on 8X00 and 4100 systems that the PCI chipset is *not* the root > nexus (or shouldn't be) [..] > This is has always been a peeve of mine about *BSD usage of root 'nexus'- the > assumption that the PCI chipset is the one and only nexus. Logically, shouldn't the "nexus" be the cpu's backplane? ie: root -> cpu -> nexus -+-> hostpci -> .... +-> otherbus etc > On Mon, 24 Jun 2002, Andrew Gallatin wrote: > > M. Warner Losh writes: > > > In message: <20020623233355.GE53233@cicely5.cicely.de> > > > Bernd Walter writes: > > > : root node is the chipset: > > > : [67]cicely9# devinfo > > > : cia0 > > > > > > OK. Is cia the only chipset, or are there others? > > > > There are many more. > > > > apecs, dwlpx, irongate, lca, mcpcia, t2, tsunami. > > And I'm probably leaving a few out. > > > > Drew Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm - peter@wemm.org; peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-alpha" in the body of the message