X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Received: by onstor-exch02.onstor.net 
	id <01C7BFFC.DC294B87@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>; Fri, 6 Jul 2007 10:38:34 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: please review
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 10:38:34 -0800
Message-ID: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E046A886A@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <20070706112920.41a6d7d4@ripper.onstor.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: please review
Thread-Index: Ace/+5KTTbq5ZFB2Rn+phHtYXZNQ5wAALSgQ
References: <20070705175356.5ff0f5df@ripper.onstor.net><BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E046A87CA@onstor-exch02.onstor.net><20070706110435.27886d67@ripper.onstor.net><BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E046A8834@onstor-exch02.onstor.net> <20070706112920.41a6d7d4@ripper.onstor.net>
From: "Maxim Kozlovsky" <maxim.kozlovsky@onstor.com>
To: "Andy Sharp" <andy.sharp@onstor.com>



>-----Original Message-----
>From: Andy Sharp
>Sent: Friday, July 06, 2007 11:29 AM
>To: Maxim Kozlovsky
>Subject: Re: please review
>
>On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 11:13:48 -0700 "Maxim Kozlovsky"
><maxim.kozlovsky@onstor.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: Andy Sharp
>> >Sent: Friday, July 06, 2007 11:05 AM
>> >To: Maxim Kozlovsky
>> >Subject: Re: please review
>> >
>> >On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 10:20:11 -0700 "Maxim Kozlovsky"
>> ><maxim.kozlovsky@onstor.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Irq.c:
>> >>
>> >> 97: Is marvell really using both interrupt lines? Can you even
>> connect
>> >> it like this? There must be a bmfpga interrupt on one of these
>> >> lines.
>> >
>> >Dude, I have no fuggin clue what I'm doing here.  Feel free to
>> >educate me.  It was just on irq 3 for the longest time, or was it
>> >irq 2?  Then I was having trouble with the CF irq, so I added it to
>> >both because some piece of documentation lists it that way.  Didn't
>> >seem to make any difference whatsoever.  If you know anything, let
>> >me in on it.
>> [MK] The interrupt works the way the code is currently, you don't
need
>> the second interrupt line. You could check if you really are getting
>> the interrupts on the second line by storing the irq in some variable
>> or something like that, but I very much doubt that you do. Since this
>> does not make any difference for you, let's undo this change.
>
>Is it hurting something?
[MK]=20
It does if we really start generating interrupts on that other line, and
we will.

>
>> >
>> >> Reset.c:
>> >>
>> >> What's wrong with using include file?
>> >
>> >what include file?  you mean for the ds1511_start_whatever
prototype?
>> >there isn't one in the .h for that, and besides, it's just one
>> >function.  if that's even what you're talking about.
>> [MK] Can we add the prototype to the include file and include it
>> properly?
>
>Why?
[MK] Why not? Prototypes should be in header files.
>
>> >
>> >> Setup.c:
>> >>
>> >> 417: Let's postpone these changes, you have not done the
>> corresponding
>> >> FC changes. This is not required currently.
>> >
>> >Actually, I've found that I can't get away with not declaring
memory.
>> >It causes the kernel to fuck up in semi-obvious ways.  I could flag
>> >it as RESERVED so it won't get used, if you're all that worried.
>> >
>> >Shit, I just noticed that I'm missing a wired entry in there for the
>> >other 128MiB.  Doh.  Actually, I should probably make that a wired
>> >entry and let the kernel do whatever it wants for the first 128M.
>> >Hmm, maybe that's a bad idea too.
>> [MK] OK as long as it is not used.
>
>I'll change that for now.  But try changing the FC code to load and run
>at 30000000 just for grins.
[MK] This is completely unnecessary for now. I have a problem with
running FC code as it is without moving it anywhere.


>
>> >> Ide-cs.c:
>> >>
>> >> 219: I don't get this while (1). It looks like it only terminates
>> >> in success case.
>> >
>> >Hey, I didn't write this shit.  Care to enlighten me?  It looks to
me
>> >like it's looking for a matching card and io window by reading CIS
>> >info from the card and checking the Vcc, Vpp, Vcw, and other stuff.
>> >Believe me, I spent several painful days in this code.
>> >
>> >If you're asking me how does it get out of the loop if it doesn't
>> >find a match, look at the CS_CHECK macro.
>> [MK] OK.
>
>Still waiting for some pearls of wisdom here.
[MK] It is OK, I've missed this code obfuscation in CS_CHECK.
