Hi Bin, On 28 July 2015 at 18:40, Bin Meng <bmeng...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Simon, > > On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 7:58 PM, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: >> Hi Bin, >> >> On 28 July 2015 at 01:50, Bin Meng <bmeng...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Simon, >>> >>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 5:47 AM, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: >>> > At present minnowmax does not correct set up PCI interrupts. This should >>> > be >>> > done in U-Boot so that devices work correctly in Linux. >>> > >>> > Note: This code needs to make use of the recent pirq_routing work. It does >>> > not seem to support all the required features, so this RFC will hopefully >>> >>> What features are missing in the existing PIRQ codes? When I did the >>> PIRQ support, I checked both TunnelCreek and BayTrail chipset >>> datasheet, and found the only difference seems to be the pci >>> configuration space vs. memory-mapped IBASE where the pci irq routing >>> registers reside. >> >> I see that each PCI device can be assigned four routes, making up a >> 16-bit register. But the code I see in pirq_assign_req() only assigns >> a single one, using a byte register. >> > > No, the pci irq routing register is still a 8-bit register on > BayTrail, where pirq_assign_irq() programs. The 16-bit register you > mentioned should be done in the platform codes. See > arch/x86/cpu/queensbay/tnc.c::cpu_irq_init(). By the way actually we > can leave those register programmed as they have the optimized default > values for all pci devices after power up, unless we intentionally > want to change them.
What do you mean by 'leave those register programmed'? Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
