newbus ioport usage

[Nate Lawson]

On Mon, 26 Jan 2004, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> In message: <20040126165523.W30461 at root.org>
>             Nate Lawson <nate at root.org> writes:
> : Ok, I'm doing the set/alloc and it works.  However, one weird thing.  If I
> : allocate all ports at boot time, it succeeds.  My driver goes through
> : multiple release/allocate cycles and it all works as expected.  However if
> : I boot and attach to only one of the registers, subsequent attempts to
> : attach the second one fail.  The resources are 2 IO ports, 0x101c and
> : 0x101d.  Both are 1 byte.
>
> Deos devinfo -r show any cause for the problem?  Maybe you aren't
> releasing them properly?  Also, why not allocate them as a block of 2?

Ok, I've found what's going on.  Apparently my acpi_sysresource0
pseudo-device is claiming all resources in its _CRS method.  If I don't
boot with 0x101c and 0x101d attached, it attaches to 0x1010-0x109d.  But
if I boot attaching them, it reserves less of the range.

    acpi_cpu0
        I/O ports:
            0x101c
            0x101d

    acpi_sysresource0
        I/O ports:
            0x10-0x1f
            0x24-0x25
            0x28-0x29
            0x2c-0x2d
            0x2e-0x2f
            0x30-0x31
            0x34-0x35
            0x38-0x39
            0x3c-0x3d
            0x50-0x53
            0x72-0x77
            0x90-0x9f
            0xa4-0xa5
            0xa8-0xa9
            0xac-0xad
            0xb0-0xb5
            0xb8-0xb9
            0xbc-0xbd
            0x101e-0x109d
            0x1180-0x11bf
            0x15e0-0x15ef
            0x1600-0x167f

I'm not sure of a way around this.  All ASL I've seen keeps these
registers contiguous so I could whack out a block of 8 of them, although
that doesn't seem correct.  Perhaps acpi_cpu should be able to override
the acpi_sysresource0 allocations, maybe by asking it for the resource if
bus_resource_alloc returns NULL.  Thoughts?

-Nate