Re: Still IRQ routing problems with bridged devices.

From: M. Warner Losh <imp_at_bsdimp.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 10:12:23 -0700 (MST)
In message: <20040101155100.GF11668_at_cicely12.cicely.de>
            Bernd Walter <ticso_at_cicely12.cicely.de> writes:
: On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 10:22:30PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
: > In message: <20040101013224.GC11668_at_cicely12.cicely.de>
: >             Bernd Walter <ticso_at_cicely12.cicely.de> writes:
: > : The board is an old Asus T2P4 with 3 bridged cards and $PIR table.
: > : All IRQs behind bridges get bogusly IRQ4 instead of the right ones.
: > : Is this only a problem on some boards or do we have a general irq
: > : routing problem with bridges?
: > 
: > It is a problem with some bridges and PCI BIOS interrupt routing.
: 
: The intline registers are correct - that's what used to run since years.
: What has the kind of bridge to do with it?

just what the code does :-)

: > : At least I know that bridge irq routing works fine on alpha.
: > : $PIR table claims to only have 7 entries - does this make sense for
: > : a 4 slot board?
: > 
: > Maybe you could post it.  It makes sense if you have on-board PCI
: > devices.
: 
: Is it shown with a boot -v or how can I get it?
: The board has 4 slots and the usual bunch of southbridge devices.

boot -v with and without your patch.

: > : If this is a board specific problem - can we at least add a loader
: > : variable to disable routing, so I don't have to patch the source on
: > : every update and can run a standart boot disk again?
: > 
: > Did it used to work when we were re-routing all the time?  It would be
: > easy to add this as an option, but maybe understanding your setup
: > might help a little to make our routing code a little smarter.
: 
: It never worked if FreeBSD decides which int to use.
: I have to disable routing in pci.c to get back to intline entries.

OK.

: What do you mean with "when we were re-routing all the time"?
: If I don't get it wrong we are re-routing all the time and
: take the result if it's a valid int.

s/were/weren't/ and it will make sense.  We used to not route all the
time, and now we do.

Warner
Received on Thu Jan 01 2004 - 08:13:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:36 UTC