Subject: Re: issues with com and non-PCI platforms.... a proposal
To: Garrett D'Amore <>
From: Jason Thorpe <>
List: tech-kern
Date: 03/09/2006 13:12:26
On Mar 9, 2006, at 1:01 PM, Garrett D'Amore wrote:

> Okay.  I think there is consensus that if I provide a compile time
> option so that on these ancient boxes the code path is no longer, then
> its okay.   I'll probably do that.  Frankly, I'll probably just do  
> it so
> that the code path is only longer on those boxes that need it.  :-)

If there is an #ifdef (and I don't think there should be--- I just  
think we should not have "register access function pointers" in the  
com_softc), it should be to DISABLE the flexibility, rather than  
enable it.

But, again, I think the best way to handle this is:

1- bus_space tags to deal with the 8-bit vs 32-bit bus access  

2- Add a register offset map to deal with the different register  
ordering on different chips.

-- thorpej