[PATCH] reverse pci config space restore order

2006-04-24 Thread Yu, Luming
According to Intel ICH spec, there are several rules that Base Address should be programmed before IOSE (PCICMD register ) enabled. For example ICH7: 12.1.3 SATA : the base address register for the bus master register should be programmed before this bit is set. 11.1.3: PCICMD (USB): The ba

Re: [PATCH] reverse pci config space restore order

2006-04-25 Thread Matthew Garrett
On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 02:50:57PM +0800, Yu, Luming wrote: > - for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) > + for (i = 15; i >= 0 ; i--) We certainly need to do /something/ here, but I'm not sure this is it. Adam Belay has code to limit PCI state restoration to the PCI-specified registers, with the idea

Re: [PATCH] reverse pci config space restore order

2006-04-25 Thread Arjan van de Ven
On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 11:48 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 02:50:57PM +0800, Yu, Luming wrote: > > > - for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) > > + for (i = 15; i >= 0 ; i--) > > We certainly need to do /something/ here, but I'm not sure this is it. > Adam Belay has code to limit

Re: [PATCH] reverse pci config space restore order

2006-04-25 Thread Matthew Garrett
On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 12:51:01PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > it has a second drawback: it assumes all devices HAVE a driver, which > isn't normally the case... Yeah, I guess there's a call for keeping a pci_save_entire_state type call and getting pci_device_suspend to use that in the no-d

RE: [PATCH] reverse pci config space restore order

2006-04-25 Thread Brown, Len
>On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 11:48 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 02:50:57PM +0800, Yu, Luming wrote: >> >> > - for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) >> > + for (i = 15; i >= 0 ; i--) >> >> We certainly need to do /something/ here, but I'm not sure >> this is it. >> Adam Belay has cod

RE: [PATCH] reverse pci config space restore order

2006-04-25 Thread abelay
Quoting "Brown, Len" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 11:48 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 02:50:57PM +0800, Yu, Luming wrote: > - for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) > + for (i = 15; i >= 0 ; i--) We certainly need to do /something/ here, but I'm not sure this is it