Re: [PLX-9050] Re: how to write driver for PCI cards

From: Gabor Kerenyi (wom@tateyama.hu)
Date: Thu Apr 11 2002 - 05:19:21 EST


On Thursday 11 April 2002 17:27, Paratimer@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 4/11/2002 12:48:12 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
>
> wom@tateyama.hu writes:
> > Yes it is a PLX-9050. The device uses interrupts, but why should I have
> > to know that what type of interrupt it is? Until now I haven't found
> > anything describing it.
> > I could find out from the docs that it uses memory I/O and everything is
> > done
> > through a 8K buffer.
>
> As I remember the serial eeprom from which the PLX-9050 is configured
> needs to be programmed differently according to the type of interrupt.

I think the device is configured properly because a windows driver exists and
it's working correctly. But what do I have to do on the driver side according
to the type of the interrupt? Is there any difference from the driver's point
if view?
Both needs the interrupt flag to be cleared.

> But more important, I do not believe your company wants to use the
> 9050 in a cPCI system. This chip does not support hot swappabilitiy.
> I believe there is an almost identical part, the PLX 9051 (or perhaps the
> 9052) that does. You might have the hardware engineer check the
> issue out.

The company uses the 9050 in a C-PCI system. The card is designed in 98 or 99.
So the card is produced and there are existing products using it. (of course
these are only windows based). But thanks for the info, I will mention the
hot swapable problem using the 9050. But I think this feature is delayed at
least until I develop the driver.
I suggested already to implement this feature in the driver if the hw supports
it but they couldn't tell me whether it supports.

Gabor

-
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/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 15 2002 - 22:00:18 EST