On Thu, 23 Nov 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> That bus setup is horribly wrong, and says that the CardBus bridge no bus
> numbers, which is obviously not correct. It somehow got through the bridge
> scanning without being fixed up..
>
> Now, the reason for why it seems to be so unhappy is apparently
>
> Scanning behind PCI bridge 00:08.0, config 000040, pass 1
> Scanning behind PCI bridge 00:08.1, config 000040, pass 1
>
> Note the "config 000040". It basically seems to imply that the cardbus
> bridge has been set up as bus 0x40, ie 64. With no secondary bus behind
> it. Which looks completely and utterly bogus.
>
> I bet the thing works for you if you change the magic constant 0xffffff in
> pci_scan_bridge() to the new magic constant 0xffff00. Basically, we don't
> much care what it reports for the primary bus number: but we _do_ care
> that a PCI bridge should have a secondary bus number.
Two down. I no longer need the Windows by-pass surgery. Thanks!
[I have attached the new dmesg and lspci output for your amusement.]
Oh, I almost forgot. When the bus numbers were wrong, and I inserted a
Cardbus card, I could no longer user lspci, since it tried to open a
non-existing file unser /proc/bus/pci/. It did not help to eject the card,
so I guess the kernel left something in a half-initialized state. Would
you like me to try to find out more details, or is it a non-issue, or
maybe obvious?
/Tobias
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 30 2000 - 21:00:11 EST