Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757303AbYAGXDO (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jan 2008 18:03:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753483AbYAGXC7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jan 2008 18:02:59 -0500 Received: from smtpq1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl ([213.51.146.200]:51850 "EHLO smtpq1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752993AbYAGXC6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jan 2008 18:02:58 -0500 Message-ID: <4782AED5.1060406@keyaccess.nl> Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 23:59:33 +0100 From: Rene Herman User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bodo Eggert <7eggert@gmx.de> CC: "H. Peter Anvin" , Christer Weinigel , Ingo Molnar , Alan Cox , "David P. Reed" , Rene Herman , Paul Rolland , Pavel Machek , Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , rol@witbe.net Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: provide a DMI based port 0x80 I/O delay override. References: <9BdU5-1YW-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <9BeZN-3Gf-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <9BnTB-1As-31@gated-at.bofh.it> <9BrX4-8go-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <9BuBG-4eR-51@gated-at.bofh.it> <9BvRd-6aL-71@gated-at.bofh.it> <9GRQW-1DX-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <9GSah-23W-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <9GSDy-2GD-23@gated-at.bofh.it> <9GTpK-40d-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <9GUvy-5H2-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <9GVKU-7SS-25@gated-at.bofh.it> <478281A6.1000704@zytor.com> <4782A355.1070207@zytor.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1333 Lines: 31 On 07-01-08 23:27, Bodo Eggert wrote: > On Mon, 7 Jan 2008, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> There might have been a few 386/20's clocking the ISA bus at ???3 (6.67 >> MHz) rather than ?2 (10 MHz) or ?2.5 (8 MHz). > > Yes, and the remaining users should set the kernel option. Both of them. > The question is: How will they be told about the new kernel option? What exactly are you guys still talking about? Alan is looking at drivers and finds that in them outb_p is generally correct and correctly specified in bus-clocks for at least some (8390 was quoted). In those legacy drivers, the _p ops can simply stay and can use the 15-year old proven 0x80 outb. (with molnar suggesting they be renamed isa_in/outb_p and me suggesting that if someone would be doing _that_ they might as well split them manually in outb(); slow_down_io() possibly renaming slow_down_io() to isa_io_delay() or similar). Is this only about the ones then left for things like legacy PIC and PIT? Does anyone care about just sticking in a udelay(2) (or 1) there as a replacement and call it a day? Rene. -- 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/