Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 24 Feb 2002 16:50:08 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 24 Feb 2002 16:49:59 -0500 Received: from ns.snowman.net ([63.80.4.34]:2063 "EHLO ns.snowman.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 24 Feb 2002 16:49:45 -0500 Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2002 16:47:47 -0500 (EST) From: To: Vojtech Pavlik cc: Rik van Riel , Alan Cox , Martin Dalecki , Troy Benjegerdes , Linus Torvalds , Andre Hedrick , Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Flash Back -- kernel 2.1.111 In-Reply-To: <20020224224246.C1949@ucw.cz> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org That was my understanding as well. It woulnd't make terribly much sense to hang a VLB off a PCI bus, and I'd expect it to be very difficult. Nick On Sun, 24 Feb 2002, Vojtech Pavlik wrote: > On Sun, Feb 24, 2002 at 06:32:09PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote: > > On Sun, 24 Feb 2002 nick@snowman.net wrote: > > > > > None of the chipsets that supported VLB had more than one buss. What > > > I don't know is some idiot may have built a VLB-VLB bridge, but I > > > doubt it. > > > > There are PCI-VLB bridges. Though it's unlikely, it may be > > possible that there are systems with multiple such bridges > > around... ;) > > Uhh? I thought most the PCI & VLB systems had the PCI hanging off the > VLB and not the other way around. At least those I've seen had it this > way. > > -- > Vojtech Pavlik > SuSE Labs > - 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/