[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200803171700.26274.david-b@pacbell.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 16:00:25 -0800
From: David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>
To: Rene Herman <rene.herman@...access.nl>
Cc: "Lev A. Melnikovsky" <melnikovsky@...l.ru>,
Alessandro Suardi <alessandro.suardi@...il.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: ehci-hcd affects hda speed
On Monday 17 March 2008, Rene Herman wrote:
> + case PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA:
> + if (pdev->device == 0x3104 && pdev->revision >= 0x60) {
Unless you have specific docs from VIA saying that this register
isn't revision-specific (at least in the sense that all revisions
after 0x60 define that bit in that way), this should probably be a
switch on pdev->revision and just include the known-safe revisions.
At one point I had a table mapping those revision codes to
specific VIA chips. Too bad I didn't keep it. ISTR that the
VT6212 has a newer revision code than the vt8235 southbridge,
and probably not as new as the vt8237 one...
But otherwise, yes -- that's the kind of patch I'd sign off on
after making this comment a bit more informative about how
that 1 usec sleep time creates an amount of PCI bus hogging.
> + u8 tmp;
> +
> + /* VT6212: EHCI sleep time 10us (default 1) */
> + pci_read_config_byte(pdev, 0x4b, &tmp);
> + pci_write_config_byte(pdev, 0x4b, tmp | 0x20);
> + }
> + break;
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists