Re: [PATCH] Reserve only needed regions for PC timers on i386 and x86_64

2005-02-23 Thread Marcelo Tosatti
On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 02:06:18PM +0100, Charles-Edouard Ruault wrote: > Alan Cox wrote: > >On Llu, 2005-02-07 at 09:29, Charles-Edouard Ruault wrote: > >>- Why is the generic timer using this address ? isn't it reserving a too > >>wide portion of IO ports ? Should it be modified for this board

Re: [PATCH] Reserve only needed regions for PC timers on i386 and x86_64

2005-02-23 Thread Marcelo Tosatti
On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 02:06:18PM +0100, Charles-Edouard Ruault wrote: Alan Cox wrote: On Llu, 2005-02-07 at 09:29, Charles-Edouard Ruault wrote: - Why is the generic timer using this address ? isn't it reserving a too wide portion of IO ports ? Should it be modified for this board ? It

[PATCH] Reserve only needed regions for PC timers on i386 and x86_64

2005-02-21 Thread Charles-Edouard Ruault
Alan Cox wrote: On Llu, 2005-02-07 at 09:29, Charles-Edouard Ruault wrote: - Why is the generic timer using this address ? isn't it reserving a too wide portion of IO ports ? Should it be modified for this board ? It just reserved the entire chip space since way back when. - If

[PATCH] Reserve only needed regions for PC timers on i386 and x86_64

2005-02-21 Thread Charles-Edouard Ruault
Alan Cox wrote: On Llu, 2005-02-07 at 09:29, Charles-Edouard Ruault wrote: - Why is the generic timer using this address ? isn't it reserving a too wide portion of IO ports ? Should it be modified for this board ? It just reserved the entire chip space since way back when. - If