[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: PCI-PCI Bridge specs problem...
Hi,
I interpret this:
"Two bridges where the primary interface of one bridge is connected to the
secondary interface of the other AND vice versa" (my capitalization)
as disallowing creating a loop with PPB1-PRI connected to PPB2-SEC when at
the same time PPB1-SEC is connected to PPB2-PRI. Thus the normal cascade
conncetion is not prohibited by this statement.
Regards,
- Olaf Birkeland
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sushant S Ranade [mailto:sushantsr@myw.ltindia.com]
> Sent: September 19, 2002 14:41
> To: pci-sig@znyx.com
> Subject: PCI-PCI Bridge specs problem...
>
>
> ** Proprietary **
>
> Hi PCI Developers,
>
> I need u'r help in understanding PCI-PCI Bridge Specs.
> I think there is one problem in the Specs 1.1 for PCI-PCI Bridge.
> Page No 16, 2.2 Capabilities Not Supported, 1.3 point,
> "Two bridges where the primary interface of one bridge is connected to
> the secondary interface of the other and vice versa"
>
> here we can interpret this statement in two ways, one for normal
> cascading (considreing downstreem bridge) and second, where two buses,
> two bridges with their interfaces reversed.
> Now the first one is normal case, and same spacs says else whaere that
> it supports it, where as the second one is the actual wrong condition.
>
> Cascade:
> #1 #2
> | -------- | --------
> ------ | | PPB#1 | | | PPB#2 |
> | Host | +--+ Bridge +---+--+ Bridge +---
> |Bridge|---+ p|________|s | p|________|s
> |______| | |
> | |
> |
> this is a comman way to put more buses. if u consider the
> PPB#2 then it satisfyes the statement.
>
> LoopBack:
> #1 #2
> | -------- |
> ------ | | PPB#1 | |
> | Host | +----+ Bridge +---+
> |Bridge|---+ p|________|s |
> |______| | |
> | -------- |
> | | PPB#2 | |
> + - + Bridge +---+
> | s|________|p |
> |
> this is not a comman way to connect PPBs. if u consider the
> PPB#2 then it satisfyes the statement.
>
> this means, PCI-PCI Bridge Specs 1.1 is not clear for its meaning.....
>
> or is there anything that i am missing?
>
> thanking in anticipation,
>
> --sushant
>
>
>
>
>