problems with pci bus on a pm520 board
Segher Boessenkool
segher at kernel.crashing.org
Sat Mar 3 11:16:31 EST 2007
>>>> 8000 is device 16, not 10
> I took the number 10 out of the sysfs bus entry. As they are printed as
> %x there.
Oh okay.
> The 10 is a 0x10 = 16. Hence 8000 seemed to be OK then. How is
> this actually supposed to be calculated? (As you can see, I know only
> little about pci stuffs) As I wrote in the last mail. The addr is
> calculated by the parser with
> laddr[0] = (pdev->bus->number << 16) | (pdev->devfn << 8)
> Since we have only one pci bus here, I suppose the bus number should be
> 0. However I'm wondering about what does this devfn stands for?
bus-dev-fn-offset is a 24-bit number; the high 8 bits are
bus number, then 5 bits device number, 3 bits function
number, and 8 bits offset. devfn is simply device and
function number combined; so your 0x8000 is bus 0, device
16, function 0 (and offset 0).
> I now finally made some processes. I made a really stupid failure and
> put the pci bus in 66 MhZ, the USB controller doesn't like it at all
> and
> went dow the hill.... Now I run the pci bus with 33MhZ and the USB
> controller is working all fine now.
Progress, good :-)
> However I still get troubles with
> the intel gd82551t ethernet controller. I connected it to the network
> and generated some activities, I even saw the phy blinking. The
> watchdog
> also works properly and reports link status. However the controller
> just
> won't generate or receive any interrupts. Both the Becker Driver and
> the
> intel driver just won't work.
Something is wrong with either the interrupts in your
device tree, or with the board wiring then.
> I noticed that the L1 information are different for the ethernet and
> usb
> controllers according to /proc/interrupts.
I have no idea what L1 is?
> for eth1 it says Main and for
> usb it says IRQ[0-3], might this be the reason of my problem?
Yeah, since...
> 64: 0 MPC52xx Main Edge eth1
> 65: 2 MPC52xx IRQ[0-3] Edge ehci_hcd:usb1,
> ohci_hcd:usb2, ohci_hcd:usb3
> The interrupt pin of the ethernet controller is connected to irq0 pin
> of
> the MPC5200B while the interrupt pin of the usb controller is connected
> to irq1 of the MPC5200B.
...you say that the ethernet controller is on IRQ0, which
would be Linux IRQ 65 as well.
> Since the usb has 65 and is working, I suppose
> strongly that 64 for the ethernet controller should also be correct.
Sounds like both should be 65 to me? Maybe someone
who has experience with 5200 can chime in, I have
never used it.
> The pci node of my the device tree now looks like this:
>
> pci at 0d00 {
> interrupt-map-mask = <f800 0 0 7>;
> interrupt-map = <8000 0 0 1 500 1 0 3 // e100, 10.0
That says: device 16.0, PIRQA, goes to phandle 500
IRQ 1 (so far so good), priority 0? I believe priority
should be one from 1..3 (but I could very well
be mistaken).
That doesn't explain why Linux throws your interrupt
at 64 instead of 65 though.
> interrupt-parent = <500>;
Oh and if you have an interrupt-map, you shouldn't
have an interrupt-parent. Not that that causes
your problem though.
> Like I mentioned before. I quite did not get the idea of all the open
> firmware things. I'd be very appreciate if you could take a near look
> on
> this and tell me if you see anything wrong with this node.
It looks pretty much sane.
Enable DEBUG in arch/powerpc/kernel/prom_parse.c ,
maybe it'll tell you a bit more. Oh and read the
5200 datasheet again, make double sure which interrupt
on the interrupt controller the four PCI interrupts
connect to.
Good luck and have fun,
Segher
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list