Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261757AbVBPBMO (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Feb 2005 20:12:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261963AbVBPBMN (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Feb 2005 20:12:13 -0500 Received: from rproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.170.202]:41134 "EHLO rproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261757AbVBPBIo (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Feb 2005 20:08:44 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=XWz/sNCc8CfoNptVsGjkCUZmFv/yJXdlgCLlKTqRk/XCIuHd/UCvlthlnutp57+hWBITxPVM8BeN9VEE8HoPDQcknKoogdLbc24i+146yMXRYx/W+kQkzY1zUXmoaB6W4+TiH3K6Afy4nL8AMmLwh2o6k/pPCXcMTfsoB0vx3o0= Message-ID: <9e473391050215170874051b29@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 20:08:44 -0500 From: Jon Smirl Reply-To: Jon Smirl To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: [PATCH] quiet non-x86 option ROM warnings Cc: Jesse Barnes , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel list In-Reply-To: <1108515632.13394.59.camel@gaston> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <200502151557.06049.jbarnes@sgi.com> <9e473391050215163621dafa65@mail.gmail.com> <200502151645.27774.jbarnes@sgi.com> <1108515632.13394.59.camel@gaston> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1303 Lines: 35 There is a new io resource flag as part of the pci rom code, IORESOURCE_ROM_SHADOW, that is used on x86. If IORESOURCE_ROM_SHADOW is set, you should ignore the physical ROM and use the copy at C000:0. Can we build an equivalent flag for PPC? On x86 arch specific code determines the boot video device and sets the flag. Acutally, if radeon and rage fb drivers were using the PCI ROM support (drivers/pci/rom.c) would they be having this problem? The 55AA check is in the PCI ROM support too. On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 12:00:31 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > I thought the signature described what type of ROM was there? E.g. 0xaa55 > > means x86 ROM, x0303 means OF ROM, etc.? > > > > At any rate, not having a ROM at all (which my case may be) isn't an error > > either, so I think removing the printk is appropriate regardless. > > Oh, and if this is the PowerBook, then you don't have a ROM attached to > the video chip, the OF driver is part of the main system ROM. > > Ben. > > -- Jon Smirl jonsmirl@gmail.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/