Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 13:27:20 -0500 (EST) From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: IRQ 2 problem Message-ID: <XFMail.20040102132720.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20040102.093712.113734642.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02-Jan-2004 M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <XFMail.20040102113123.jhb@FreeBSD.org> > John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> writes: >: > It looks like IRQ2 isn't registered as an interrupt source, so when we >: > create the resource map, it looks like we skip it and shouldn't be >: > handing it out... >: >: Yes, it doesn't exist as a valid IRQ in the irq map anymore. Oh, but you >: know what, the resource manager is really buggy in this respect. For example, >: on my system here: >: >: Interrupt request lines: >: 0x0 (root0) >: 0x1 (atkbd0) >: 0x2 (root0) >: 0x3 (sio1) >: 0x4 (sio0) >: 0x5-0x8 (root0) >: 0x9 (acpi0) >: 0xa-0xb (root0) >: 0xc (psm0) >: 0xd (npx0) >: 0xe (ata0) >: 0xf (ata1) >: 0x10 (uhci0) >: 0x11 (sis0) >: 0x12 (uhci2) >: 0x13 (uhci1) >: 0x14 (fxp0) >: 0x15-0x17 (root0) >: >: Note that the nexus didn't add IRQ 2 as a possible resource, but the >: resource manager went ahead and added it anyway when the adjacent >: regions were added. Someone should fix the resource manager code >: perhaps. > > Interesting. Of course the default behavior for the devinfo stuff is > to say that root owns it, so I'm not 100% convinced that it is a bug > in the resource manager, necessarily... It fails to report shared > resources correctly, but they are none-the-less allocated correctly. > > I'm curious why the new PIC driver doesn't allocate IRQ 2 itself... It does it by not making it available in the first place. -- 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?XFMail.20040102132720.jhb>