From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Jun 10 01:17:36 1997
Return-Path: <owner-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id BAA18630
          for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 01:17:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Sisyphos.MI.Uni-Koeln.DE (Sisyphos.MI.Uni-Koeln.DE [134.95.212.10])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id BAA18622
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 01:17:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from x14.mi.uni-koeln.de (annexr2-47.slip.Uni-Koeln.DE) by Sisyphos.MI.Uni-Koeln.DE with SMTP id AA19145
  (5.67b/IDA-1.5 for <hackers@freebsd.org>); Tue, 10 Jun 1997 10:16:12 +0200
Received: (from se@localhost) by x14.mi.uni-koeln.de (8.8.5/8.6.9) id KAA28913; Tue, 10 Jun 1997 10:16:07 +0200 (CEST)
X-Face: "<d]#=8pzx);RzeqSKI86OVa7=!0/(uRa.+B.9Z9\eNUn@UG?!`y7yt2dFNn%k4'.}](uE%
 yCO)$e&Y1%3EO~ifu6Q-#YUM&JZ't,}JkPnAz,8Dj33u%@GBi%[Y#LHz$]h7a<p4)-jKI7~sKjlP-^
 EvA[G;]v&0]W!EL%shs,{7x0|oqN4YVIs5,NI#,V{9"WF):5&RkOhyj*#-IAG}Tnu;YCF,d
Message-Id: <19970610101445.26928@mi.uni-koeln.de>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 10:14:45 +0200
From: Stefan Esser <se@FreeBSD.ORG>
To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Cc: stesin@gu.net, bob@luke.pmr.com, matt@3am-software.com,
        hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Does SMC9332BDT work in 2.2.2R??
References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970609185104.15820Q-100000@trifork.gu.net> <199706091814.LAA29703@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.74
In-Reply-To: <199706091814.LAA29703@phaeton.artisoft.com>; from Terry Lambert on Mon, Jun 09, 1997 at 11:14:57AM -0700
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Jun 9, Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> wrote:
> Here is a duplicate of a response I've sent in the past.  I suspect
> that it is the problem in your case.
> 
> 
> | This is probably the problem (the 5th slot, not the bus mastering).
> | 
> | It has to do with PCI interrupt sharing.
> | 
> | The PCI INT's are normally daisy-chained, and slots 4 and 5 (if 5
> | is present) are expected to share:
> | 
> |        slot 1       slot 2       slot 3       slot 4       slot 5
> |         ,-.          ,-.          ,-.          ,-.          ,-.
> | INT A --|A|-. ,------|B|-. ,------|C|-. ,------|D|----------|D|
> |         | |  X       | |  X       | |  X       | |          | |
> | INT B --| |-' \ ,----| |-' \ ,----| |-' \ ,----| |----------| |
> |         | |    X     | |    X     | |    X     | |          | |
> | INT C --| |---' \ ,--| |---' \ ,--| |---' \ ,--| |----------| |
> |         | |      X   | |      X   | |      X   | |          | |
> | INT D --| |-----' `--| |-----' `--| |-----' `--| |----------| |
> |         `-'          `-'          `-'          `-'          `-'
> | 
> | By default, each PCI card will use the first interrupt connector,
> | which will be A, B, C, or D, depending on the slot (note: old PCI
> | hardware will *NOT* chain... it expects the boards to be jumper
> | configurable, or all boards to share INT A).

Why should that cause ANY problems 
for a bus-master card in slot 5 ???

Regards, STefan