Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 14:28:51 -0500 From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: ticso@cicely.de, Bernd Walter <ticso@cicely12.cicely.de> Cc: current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Still IRQ routing problems with bridged devices. Message-ID: <200401231428.51871.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20040102224015.GI17023@cicely12.cicely.de> References: <20040102195244.GE17023@cicely12.cicely.de> <XFMail.20040102163044.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20040102224015.GI17023@cicely12.cicely.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday 02 January 2004 05:40 pm, Bernd Walter wrote: > On Fri, Jan 02, 2004 at 04:30:44PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote: > > 3) the host bridge lookes up 0.2.0 INTA in the $PIR, chooses an IRQ from > > the possible list (defaults to just using first IRQ) and returns it. > > This step should be skipping IRQ 4 adn using IRQ 10 or 11 instead > > That's the interesting part. > What exactly is in the $PIR table? > Fact is that the 4 PCI connectors share the same intlines wired in > different INTA-D order which is board specific. > The intlines are setup by the BIOS to 5, 10, 11 and 12. > Now FreeBSD has found out that it needs 0.2.0 INTA for the bridged device > 1.8.0 INTA. > It now incorrectly selects IRQ4 for 0.2.0 INTA, which is already > in use for a ISA device by an PnP On-Board component. > It also has to connect the intline with IRQ4 anywhere in the chipset, > which doesn't seem to happen, because the IRQ doesn't even work. > And I don't see the point why this is not a problem for non bridged > devices, which would also require an IRQ for 0.2.0 INTA. Can you please try the patch at http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/patches/pir.patch -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200401231428.51871.jhb>