[coreboot] Resource allocation
Myles Watson
mylesgw at gmail.com
Thu Nov 13 22:01:18 CET 2008
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 12:14 PM, ron minnich <rminnich at gmail.com> wrote:
> {
> device_operations = "w83627thg_ops";
> /* To override any of these, put the over-ride in mainboard dts. */
>
> /* COM1 */
> pnp at 2{
> com1dev = "2";
> com1enable = "0";
> com1io = "0x3f8";
> com1irq = "4";
> };
>
>
>
> Questions I have no answer to:
> Before I put the pnp2 in , we got this:
>
>
> struct superio_winbond_w83627thg_dts_config domain_0_ioport_2e = {
> .com1dev = 0x2,
> .com1enable = 0x0,
> .com1io = 0x3f8,
>
> etc.
>
> What should we get now?
struct superio_common_pnp domain_0_ioport_2e_pnp_2 = {
.enable = 0x0,
.io = 3f8,
struct superio_common_pnp domain_0_ioport_2e_pnp_5 = {
.enable = 0x0,
.io = 3f8,
etc.
> Should pnp2 be a device?
That's the way it is now. I'm just making them static instead of dynamic.
> Child or sibling of w83627thg?
Child? That's how I did it.
> What
> device_operations should it have?
Enable and set.
> One possibiltiy: if no
> device_operations property in the pnp at 2 node,
> inherit from parent.
That's how I did it the first time, but then I saw that you were already
passing it into the PNP code in the info structure, so I took it back out.
>
> What do you want to see?
>
I'm not picky if it works. I could go back and implement it with it all
inside the device. I would just have to change the PNP code a _lot_ more
than I did. There would have to be more passes so that you could get the
devices set up, then go back and initialize them with resources. I was
trying to minimize changes.
Thanks,
Myles
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/attachments/20081113/41ea34e3/attachment.html>
More information about the coreboot
mailing list