> -----Original Message----- > From: Marc Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 3:26 PM > To: Myles Watson > Cc: 'ron minnich'; 'Coreboot' > Subject: Re: [coreboot] v3 HT > > Myles Watson wrote: > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Marc Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 3:10 PM > >> To: Myles Watson > >> Cc: 'ron minnich'; 'Coreboot' > >> Subject: Re: [coreboot] v3 HT > >> > >> Myles Watson wrote: > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: ron minnich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 8:57 AM > >>>> To: Myles Watson > >>>> Cc: Coreboot > >>>> Subject: Re: [coreboot] v3 HT > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 7:48 AM, Myles Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> wrote: > >>>>> I don't think we need to expand the dts to fix this, we just need to > >>>> make > >>>>> the code match the structure. > >>>> Do you have a rough idea of how this would look in the code? This is > a > >>>> good catch. > >>> Right now the code goes through the list of children and initializes > >> them as > >>> bridges, without checking to see that they are. Then it enumerates > them > >>> with the pci code. > >>> > >>> I think we'd have to find the children that are bridges and then > >> enumerate > >>> them with the list of children, so that we can pass parameters > >> correctly. I > >>> don't think it would be too hard. > >>> > >>> 1. Find bridges and set them to not decode > >>> 2. Set first bridge to decode all device numbers (HT Unit IDs) > >>> 3. Do PCI scan on bridge with remaining non-bridge children > >>> 4. Find next bridge > >>> 5. Set to decode next device numbers > >>> 6. Goto 3 > >> I think that the dts is can/should to handle arbitrary bus numbering > >> (since a bridge can be plugged into any slot making everything change). > >> The numbers are not so important if as long as the tree has the same > >> connections (bridgeA has device 1, 2, 3 and bridgeB has x, y, z). > >> > >> I don't think that you need a bridge scan before the device scan. It > can > >> be done as one. The device tree just needs to note the appropriate > >> decode (bus number) for the bridge and the devices under it. Also, If > >> the bus is already numbered we we shouldn't change it. Just use what is > >> set. > > > > So the collapse existing enumeration needs to be taken out? > > I didn't know that there was a collapse. That might not be good since a > bridge could be "hard coded" to a location. That is ok if bus numbers > are arbitrary. It they get colapsed that would be bad. I need to go > understand this part of the dts/scan more.
It's not part of the dts. It's also in v2 ht_collapse_early_enumeration. Thanks, Myles -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
