Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 22:22:21 +0100 From: se@freebsd.org (Stefan Esser) To: smp@csn.net (Steve Passe) Cc: se@freebsd.org (Stefan Esser), smp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Adaptec 3940UW and SMP Message-ID: <Mutt.19970117222221.se@x14.mi.uni-koeln.de> In-Reply-To: <199701172106.OAA19748@clem.systemsix.com>; from Steve Passe on Jan 17, 1997 14:06:32 -0700 References: <Mutt.19970117213511.se@x14.mi.uni-koeln.de> <199701172106.OAA19748@clem.systemsix.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jan 17, smp@csn.net (Steve Passe) wrote: > I believe PCI_MAX_IRQ is properly increased to 24 in all the necessary places, > I know it works properly in general as many of us are using PCI > cards >IRQ15. Ok. I forgot about this patch ... I still think there is a problem with the installation of the shared PCI interrupt handler, if I read the log messages corerctly. Are there actually motherboards, that have a PCI BIOS capable of assigning memory and I/O mappings to devices behind PPBs, but fail to setup the interrupt routing correctly ? I've seen a few MBs, that probe at most two levels of bridges deep (i.e. do support a AH3940 behind another PPB, but not in a PCI bus extension box, which got two PPBs (back to back) between its slots and the primary PCI bus). Regards, STefan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Mutt.19970117222221.se>