[PATCHES 2.5] pcmcia: add struct pcmcia_device
rmk at arm.linux.org.uk
Sat Apr 19 19:11:31 BST 2003
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 06:52:51PM +0200, Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> a) for statically mapped sockets
> Is _any_ user input needed (buggy firm- or hardware don't count) to know what
> resources (irq, io, mem) are used by this socket? If not, there's no need
> for the ioctl, right?
> [stuff cut which requires more thought]
> > There is one additional snag for windowed sockets - rsrc_mgr.c also
> > contains a load of IRQ-"resource" based code which is pretty much tied
> > into the pcmcia core at the moment, but we ideally want rsrc_mgr.c to
> > be part of mapwindow.c.
> Is the IRQ for statically mapped sockets fixed as well?
Not necessarily. I'm not sure about Pavels sockets, but many of my
non-x86 pcmcia sockets use fixed IRQs. In fact, I don't think I have
one non-x86 machine which isn't using fixed IRQs (and this includes
the machine with the cardbus bridge in.)
> > Most of the ideas Pavel's coming up with are already known by myself and
> > I have plans and solutions in various stages of evolution to them.
> Good. What are the rough edges?
Probably the biggest ones are:
- set_io_map and set_mem_map socket driver methods
These are the wrong calls to be made to the socket driver, moreso for
statically mapped sockets than windowed sockets. Their expectations
for static mapped sockets is completely different to that for windowed
This doesn't work on any statically mapped socket - it assumes windowed
sockets (ie, it can use the previously allocated virtual address space
and just call pcmcia_modify_window to map that virtual address space
to some other part of card memory.)
> It seems to me that this is the showstopper
> before struct pcmcia_device can be merged (and much other fancy stuff
> depends on that...)
It's a little unfortunate that everything else depends on this change. ;(
Russell King (rmk at arm.linux.org.uk) The developer of ARM Linux
More information about the linux-pcmcia