This is the mail archive of the
ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the eCos project.
Re: PCI arbiter settings
- From: Jani Monoses <jani at iv dot ro>
- To: ecos-discuss at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 15:36:15 +0300
- Subject: Re: [ECOS] PCI arbiter settings
- References: <Law11-OE5440sP2Bk870000ac29@hotmail.com><3F27A7C0.9060703@eCosCentric.com><Law11-OE36oELCMIAw20000ad7b@hotmail.com><m3n0ewgobc.fsf@miso.calivar.com><Law11-OE34j7sKRrBad0000c0de@hotmail.com><m3fzkn9cee.fsf@miso.calivar.com><3F29B51D.8000503@eCosCentric.com><m3d6fp64ee.fsf@miso.calivar.com>
On 01 Aug 2003 11:47:21 +0100
Nick Garnett <nickg@ecoscentric.com> wrote:
> Jonathan Larmour <jifl@eCosCentric.com> writes:
>
> > Hmm... according to
> > <http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/show_bug.cgi?id=55891>:
> >
> > "in the function cyg_pci_get_device_info the probe function stops
> > when an inactive bar is found. This is not right. It free to choose
> > any of the BAR's to use in the hardware so all 6 BARS have to be
> > scanned. (see PCI- spec Revision 2.2 page 204)"
> >
> > This may not be the problem right in this case... I just notice what
> > you say doesn't agree with what's quoted above with page ref.
> >
>
> I'm sure that was the case at one point. I certainly have always
> believed this to be true, and Jesper obviously believed it when he
> wrote the PCI library. Maybe this is a development in later versions
> of the spec. In which case we still have to be careful with devices
> implemented to an earlier version.
"A device may use any location to implement BARs" . I've just looked and
this sentence is there in spec 2.2 but not in 2.1
Jani
--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss