Re: Devices not at mainbus?
On Jun 5, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote: Aside from pseudodevices, do we have any devices which aren't children of mainbus? Some ports' use of obio seems like, perhaps, a candidate for this, but I have not started checking them all. directly or through parents? Not all ports use mainbus. shark uses ofbus at root (only cpu attaches to mainbus).
Re: Devices not at mainbus?
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 08:52:38AM -0700, Matt Thomas wrote: On Jun 5, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote: Aside from pseudodevices, do we have any devices which aren't children of mainbus? Some ports' use of obio seems like, perhaps, a candidate for this, but I have not started checking them all. directly or through parents? Through parents. I'm looking at trying to inherit maxphys down the device tree. Not all ports use mainbus. shark uses ofbus at root (only cpu attaches to mainbus). Oof. That's the answer, then, I guess. -- Thor Lancelot Simont...@panix.com We cannot usually in social life pursue a single value or a single moral aim, untroubled by the need to compromise with others. - H.L.A. Hart
Re: Devices not at mainbus?
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 12:03:49PM -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote: Aside from pseudodevices, do we have any devices which aren't children of mainbus? Some ports' use of obio seems like, perhaps, a candidate for this, but I have not started checking them all. directly or through parents? Through parents. I'm looking at trying to inherit maxphys down the device tree. Not all ports use mainbus. shark uses ofbus at root (only cpu attaches to mainbus). Oof. That's the answer, then, I guess. Does it matter? Is there a case where a driver's notion of MAXPHYS should depend on anything other than the buses it's attached to? -- David A. Holland dholl...@netbsd.org
Re: Devices not at mainbus?
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 06:06:08PM +, David Holland wrote: Does it matter? Is there a case where a driver's notion of MAXPHYS should depend on anything other than the buses it's attached to? I see you say buses. So I assume you're taking into account funny constraints to do with bus bridges. Some ports do have limits stricter than those actually associated with any physical bus in the machine. Xen is a good example. Thor
Re: Devices not at mainbus?
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 02:14:02PM -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote: Does it matter? Is there a case where a driver's notion of MAXPHYS should depend on anything other than the buses it's attached to? I see you say buses. So I assume you're taking into account funny constraints to do with bus bridges. Yes. Some ports do have limits stricter than those actually associated with any physical bus in the machine. Xen is a good example. ah, and then the question is where to manifest those. right... -- David A. Holland dholl...@netbsd.org
Re: Devices not at mainbus?
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 02:14:02PM -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote: On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 06:06:08PM +, David Holland wrote: Does it matter? Is there a case where a driver's notion of MAXPHYS should depend on anything other than the buses it's attached to? I see you say buses. So I assume you're taking into account funny constraints to do with bus bridges. Some ports do have limits stricter than those actually associated with any physical bus in the machine. Xen is a good example. Actually, anything that has a MAXPHYS restriction in Xen attaches to hypervisor. So hypervisorbus could set the property ... -- Manuel Bouyer bou...@antioche.eu.org NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference --
