cardbus trouble

[Dylan Wylie]

Yep, its 'a work'n :-)

cbb0: Secondary bus is 0
cbb0: Secondary bus set to 2 subbus 3

ath0 cardbus card up and running.

Thanks.
Thanks, Stuart as well for you response.
Let me know if I can do anything else.

bye bye

Dylan

On 9 May 2004 at 8:06, M. Warner Losh wrote:

> In message: <409E0D5A.19164.559D04D at localhost>
>             "Dylan Wylie" <d.wylie at hccnet.nl> writes:
> : Yes, it used to work perfectly.
> 
> I was afraid that you were going to say that :-(.
> 
> : The dmesg with both cardbus and cbb debuging enabled is included below.
> : Again, it shows insertion of the cardbus card which fails, followed by the pccard 
> : card, which succeedes.
> : I also don't remember any 'lazy allocation' with the working builds.
> 
> The lazy allocation is fine, I'm pretty sure.  Let's look at things in
> more detail, and I think the debug shows where we go off the rails:
> 
> : pcib0: <ACPI Host-PCI bridge> port 0xcf8-0xcff on acpi0
> 
> host bridge.
> 
> : pci0: <ACPI PCI bus> on pcib0
> 
> pci bus 0.
> 
> : agp0: <VIA Generic host to PCI bridge> mem 0xf8000000-0xfbffffff at device 0.0 on pci0
> : agp0: Reserved 0x4000000 bytes for rid 0x10 type 3 at 0xf8000000
> 
> agp0 at pci0.0.0.
> 
> 
> : pcib1: <ACPI PCI-PCI bridge> at device 1.0 on pci0
> : pcib1: could not get PCI interrupt routing table for \\_SB_.PCI0.AGP_ - 
> : AE_NOT_FOUND
> : pci1: <ACPI PCI bus> on pcib1
> : pci1: <display, VGA> at device 0.0 (no driver attached)
> 
> VGA at pci1.0.0.
> 
> : cbb0: <TI1211 PCI-CardBus Bridge> at device 10.0 on pci0
> 
> cbb is at pci0.10.0.
> 
> : cbb0: Secondary bus is 0
> : cbb0: Secondary bus set to 1 subbus 2
> 
> DANGER WILL ROBINSON.  Secondary bus is now being set to 1.  Before I
> think we kludged it to 2 always, but I might be mistaken.  However,
> this is clearly the problem reguardless of what we used to do.
> 
> : cardbus0: <display, VGA> at device 0.0 (no driver attached)
> 
> Hmmm, odd that it is now being probed just like the device at
> pci1.0.0, don't you think?
> 
> So, give the following patch a spin.  Try 3 and 4 if this fails.
> Clearly this is a bogus patch from a generic point of view, but it is
> good for testing.
> 
> Warner
>