2011/9/5 Wolfgang Grandegger <[email protected]> > On 09/05/2011 07:35 PM, Willy Lambert wrote: > > 2011/9/5 Wolfgang Grandegger <[email protected]> > > > >> On 09/04/2011 09:09 PM, Willy Lambert wrote: > >>> 2011/9/3 Wolfgang Grandegger <[email protected]> > >> ... > >>>> What CAN hardware are you using? > >>> > >>> > >>> Motherboad and CAN stack : > >>> > >> > http://www.advantech.com/products/PCM-3362/mod_2B69DA4C-D506-4AEA-8CC3-F6E58E3CBC87.aspx > >>> http://www.ixxat.com/pc_i_04_104_en.html > >> > >> OK... > >> > >>>> And what bus is it > >>>> connected to? Why do I ask? In "arch/x86/Kconfig" there is: > >>>> > >>>> # x86_64 have no ISA slots, but can have ISA-style DMA. > >>>> config ISA_DMA_API > >>>> bool "ISA-style DMA support" if (X86_64 && EXPERT) > >>>> default y > >>>> help > >>>> Enables ISA-style DMA support for devices requiring such > >>>> controllers. > >>>> If unsure, say Y. > >>>> > >>>> if X86_32 > >>>> > >>>> config ISA > >>>> bool "ISA support" > >>>> ---help--- > >>>> Find out whether you have ISA slots on your motherboard. ISA > >> is > >>>> the > >>>> name of a bus system, i.e. the way the CPU talks to the other > >>>> stuff > >>>> inside your box. Other bus systems are PCI, EISA, > MicroChannel > >>>> (MCA) or VESA. ISA is an older system, now being displaced > by > >>>> PCI; > >>>> newer boards don't support it. If you have ISA, say Y, > >> otherwise > >>>> N. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Maybe the assumption that the x86_64 does not have ISA slots is wrong > >> and > >>>> we > >>>> should fix that instead of moving to a platform driver like Oliver > >>>> suggested. > >> > >> Intel Atom N450 on that board supports the PC/104-Plus bus, which is PCI > >> (not ISA) based, therefore a SJA1000-PCI-driver seems more appropriate. > >> Do you find the SJA1000 device with "lspci -vv"? > > Ah, at a closer look, the PC/104-Plus is an extension of the PC/104 from > factor with an additional connector for PCI. It therefore still supports > ISA bus communication, which the IXXAT PC-I 04/104 board uses. > > Therefore I'm going to prepare a patch removing the "X86_32" restriction > for CONFIG_ISA above. Sorry for confusion. >
May I bump this up ? I read your conversation on other linux ML, but I don't really know how it ended. > > Wolfgang. >
_______________________________________________ Socketcan-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-users
