From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 18 17:50:40 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47D8016A560 for ; Fri, 18 Feb 2005 17:50:11 +0000 (GMT) Received: from anuket.mj.niksun.com (gwnew.niksun.com [65.115.46.162]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CD9E43D5C for ; Fri, 18 Feb 2005 17:50:06 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jkim@niksun.com) Received: from [10.70.0.244] (daemon.mj.niksun.com [10.70.0.244]) by anuket.mj.niksun.com (8.13.1/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j1IHnu2p017605; Fri, 18 Feb 2005 12:49:56 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jkim@niksun.com) From: Jung-uk Kim Organization: Niksun, Inc. To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 12:49:53 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: <20050218.102310.74705720.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <20050218.102310.74705720.imp@bsdimp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200502181249.53139.jkim@niksun.com> X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.83/709/Fri Feb 18 09:37:50 2005 on anuket.mj.niksun.com X-Virus-Status: Clean cc: Warner Losh Subject: Re: PC Card subpart to R3000 thread X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 17:50:40 -0000 On Friday 18 February 2005 12:23 pm, Warner Losh wrote: > # I'll note that I really like to be cc'd on changes that impact > the # pccard part of the system :-) > > : Yeah the recipient of the fix just emailed me about this, I am > : guessing that the #if 0 is the uncommitable part. Is there any > : way that this can be done by the kernel (the PCI reg write, that > : is)? Is there any reason that it can't be done there? > > I'd be extremely reluctant to commit the #if 0 part of the fix. > The problem is that we don't quite do bus numbering/renumbering > correctly for pci busses in general. There's some kludges in > cardbus bridge to cope with this, but I don't like them much at > all. > > So, yes, something can be done about this in the kernel, but that > something is rather more complicated than this overly simplistic > kludge. Exactly. :-) > --- src/sys/dev/pci/pci_pci.c.orig Thu Jul 1 03:46:28 2004 > +++ src/sys/dev/pci/pci_pci.c Sat Jan 22 01:21:50 2005 > @@ -319,6 +319,8 @@ > start = sc->iobase; > if (end > sc->iolimit) > end = sc->iolimit; > + if (start <= end) > + ok = 1; > > > This looks OK to me. At first I thought it was crazy and > unnecessary to set this, but I think it might be OK. It does seem > very odd that we've not seen this before now. Oh, wait, the <= > should be <. == would imply that the range is 0. Oops, my bad. Thanks for committing this! Jung-uk Kim > Warner