Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 16:09:40 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: vanmaren@fast.cs.utah.edu (Kevin Van Maren) Cc: matt@lkg.dec.com, smp@csn.net, ken@housing1.stucen.gatech.edu, kmitch@weenix.guru.org, se@zpr.uni-koeln.de, smp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Adaptec 3940UW and SMP Message-ID: <199701152309.QAA04843@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <199701152240.PAA01822@fast.cs.utah.edu> from "Kevin Van Maren" at Jan 15, 97 03:40:06 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Again, I agree: mapping IRQs behind bridges does seem tricky. Of course, > mapping anything but INT A will give you the same problems! They really > should be in the table... ...uh, how could they be? This would require his BIOS ROM to know about the Adaptec card plugged into the machine! As someone already pointed out, the PCI-PCI bridge chip identified itself, and should have been seen as INTB due to the PCI 1.0 bridge specification (1.0 is old -- April 5, 1994 -- anyone have a newer one from the PCI SIG that disagrees with mine?). Contact: PCI Spcial Interest Group M/S JFS-51 5200 N.E. Elam Young Parkway Hillsboro, Oregon 97124-6497 (503)696-6111 For current PCI specifications and materials... The real problem is that you really need a bridge-specific driver to be able to ask the bridge chipset itself. Nevertheless, knowing there is a bridge there, you should know INT B will be used from examining the posted MPtable stuff... I think Steve said that code wasn't written? Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199701152309.QAA04843>