From owner-freebsd-current Wed Mar 15 11:16:23 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from piranha.amis.net (piranha.amis.net [212.18.32.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 132E437BB6B for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2000 11:16:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from blaz@amis.net) Received: from titanic.medinet.si (titanic.medinet.si [212.18.32.66]) by piranha.amis.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 763845D20; Wed, 15 Mar 2000 20:16:12 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 20:16:12 +0100 (CET) From: Blaz Zupan X-Sender: blaz@titanic.medinet.si To: Warner Losh Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: pccard not working on 4.0-RELEASE In-Reply-To: <200003151849.LAA88375@harmony.village.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > : pcic0: at port 0x3e0 iomem 0xd0000 on isa0 > This is a slight lie. > You might want to try this at 0x3e2. It is worth a shot. Bingo, it works! Now I'm wondering, GENERIC says: device pcic0 at isa? irq 10 port 0x3e0 iomem 0xd0000 device pcic1 at isa? irq 11 port 0x3e2 iomem 0xd4000 disable Neither seems quite correct for my situation, where I use device pcic0 at isa? port 0x3e2 iomem 0xd0000 Is there a standard for this and are the above addresses just backwards? I'll do another test with just device pcic0 at isa? as specified in LINT. Blaz Zupan, blaz@amis.net, http://home.amis.net/blaz/ Medinet d.o.o., Linhartova 21, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message