3 messages, 3 authors, 2000-03-03 · open the first message on its own page
From: Cort Dougan <hidden>
Date: 2000-03-03 09:32:57
I think the 850's need this. I don't have one and haven't tested on one but I recall some IDE silliness was necessary. ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <hidden>
Date: 2000-03-03 09:40:03
On Fri, 3 Mar 2000, Cort Dougan wrote:
I think the 850's need this. I don't have one and haven't tested on one but I recall some IDE silliness was necessary.
BTW, I'm in favor of having ide_*()-ops for all accesses, cfr. my comments in
the sources. Then we can distinguish between I/O port and I/O memory acces on a
per-machine/architecture base.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven ------------- Sony Software Development Center Europe (SDCE)
Geert.Uytterhoeven@sonycom.com ------------------- Sint-Stevens-Woluwestraat 55
Voice +32-2-7248638 Fax +32-2-7262686 ---------------- B-1130 Brussels, Belgium
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
From: Dan Malek <hidden>
Date: 2000-03-03 21:36:10
Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
BTW, I'm in favor of having ide_*()-ops for all accesses,....
Can I also have md.ide_*() for interrupts as well? Please :-). On embedded processors we have internal interrupt controllers that require different initialization and ack'ing than the assumed 8259 type controllers. Thanks. -- Dan ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/