On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 22:30:07 +0100 Wolfgang Denk <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dear Scott Wood, > > In message <[email protected]> you wrote: > > > > > Would that hurt? I though Linux does it's own initialization of the > > > PCI system anyway, so does it matter what we did in U-Boot? > > > > It's caused us problems in the past on 83xx. I think it still relies > > on U-Boot's config. > > I tend to consider this a bug in the Linux code, then. Possibly -- and certainly it doesn't seem like something that should be one way on 83xx and another way on 85xx. There are some cooperative AMP cases where it's easier to have Linux just not touch anything, though that needn't affect what happens in the normal case. I do recall the server-side powerpc people liking to keep all PCI device assignments as the firmware left them, as they tend to have early consoles on PCI and don't want to disrupt them by moving BARs around (esp. if debug output is enabled in the PCI code). There could be some weirdness if the mismatch causes there to be overlap with something else that U-Boot has set up -- possibly just temporarily, such as if U-Boot assigns address X to PCI0 and Y to PCI1, and Linux assigns address X to PCI1 and Y to PCI0. Linux might set PCI0 to the new address and try to initialize it before it gets to looking at PCI1. In general, it seems like something that we'd like to know about if they don't match, even if we fix the 83xx dependency. Also, while 85xx sets the ATMU registers, I don't see where Linux sets the LAWs. -Scott _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
