LPC bus device driver

[Marlin22]

Hi all,

Im kind of novice when it comes to device drivers but I am currently looking into a driver for a legacy device attached to a LPC bus. My device is built in as a block in a FPGA. I wonder if you guys can help me with some tips of how to start.

I have a access to a driver for a similar device , but that device i not a part of a FPGA and attached to a PCI slot, so it is written as a PnP driver. My idea is to modify that PnP driver and use it for my LPC-device. Is that a bad idea? I guess I have to remove all PnP parts since the LPC bus doesn´t support PnP .

Basically, what I need is to access some I/O port adresses to communicate with the FPGA and also allocate two IRQ:s (ISA).

My Questions:

1. Is it a bad idea, or maybe even possible, to modify the PnP driver and rewrite it for my LPC bus device? If not, what do you suggest?

2. How do I allocate resources for my LPC device, such as IRQ:s and the I/O ports? The PnP driver seems to do it by "IoReportResourceForUsage" and for the IRQ, "IoConnectInterrupt". How is it done for a non PnP driver?

Thanks in advice...

/Marlin22

[dosfan]

Welcome to the forum

I think people will have trouble answering your question as you didn't mention host operating system. My guess would be Windows driver development?

I think you may have misunderstood this forum. Most people here are writing hobby operating systems for various architechtures.

Please be more specific and we won't have to guess.


Cheers
Ian

[Love4Boobies]

Nah, it's probably the right sub-forum to write into. Anyway, it really depends on the device you're talking about - I really doubt there are any devices that have the same programming interface for both LPC and PNP. Also, note that PnP is an expansion for ISA buses that enable devices to be configured automatically - it has nothing to do with PCI. LPC is the modern variant of ISA and is compatible with it.

[Owen]

I hate to say something like this again, but I do wonder if theres a necropost virus going around this forum's members...

[inx]

I hate to say something like this again, but I do wonder if theres a necropost virus going around this forum's members...

This thread was only dead by a month, and at least there's some activity around here. It's been very slow the past few days.

[Owen]

I hate to say something like this again, but I do wonder if theres a necropost virus going around this forum's members...

This thread was only dead by a month, and at least there's some activity around here. It's been very slow the past few days.

The person who created this thread has exactly one post, and last visited the forum 1 day after creating it. It's unlikely they're monitoring this topic. Additionally, the topic is not actually on the subject that this forum deals with. Finally, the question itself indicates that it's poster lacks much essential knowledge on the topic that he is asking about.

Necroposting isn't bad always - just when it revives a topic that has been abandoned by it's original poster simply to answer their question. For the discussion topics common in the theory section, it's fine; as it is for any questions on tutorials. But for this kind of question? It serves no purpose.

[Love4Boobies]

I didn't notice the post was 1 month old but I don't think that's old anyway. And if what you say were true, we shouldn't answer people with only 1 post and thus should never accept new members (unless they spam with a bunch of questions just to get one of the answered).