From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 11 21:12:58 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FE3E16A4E0; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 21:12:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from server.baldwin.cx (66-23-211-162.clients.speedfactory.net [66.23.211.162]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07A5A43D70; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 21:12:52 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from localhost.corp.yahoo.com (john@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by server.baldwin.cx (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k6BLColH077651; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 17:12:50 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) From: John Baldwin To: Bill Paul Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 17:12:43 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <20060711203213.3C7C816A4E1@hub.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20060711203213.3C7C816A4E1@hub.freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200607111712.44933.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0.2 (server.baldwin.cx [127.0.0.1]); Tue, 11 Jul 2006 17:12:52 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.87.1/1592/Tue Jul 11 16:40:37 2006 on server.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=4.2 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on server.baldwin.cx Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: if_re does not work X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 21:12:58 -0000 On Tuesday 11 July 2006 16:32, Bill Paul wrote: > > > > In theory the bus_alloc_resource(.., SYS_RES_IRQ, ...) should route an > > > interrupt for the re0 device but it won't show up in the probe line in that > > > case since the probe line is printed before re_attach() is called. In fact, > > > in the failing case, it wasn't bus_alloc_resource() that failed, but > > > bus_setup_intr(). This is most likely not an re0 issue however. > > > > > > goto-san, can you add printf's to i386/i386/intr_machdep.c:intr_add_handler() > > > and kern/kern_intr.c:intr_event_add_handler() to see which of the EINVAL > > > cases is being triggered? > > > > I added printf() to 2 functions (one in intr_add_handler() and two > > in intr_event_add_handler()) and re-build my kernel and reboot my > > ThinkPad X40. But I could not get any printf's messages. > > > > And I have a question. Why INTR_FAST was added in re_attach()? > > When I deleted it and re-build if_re modules, my card was attached. > > INTR_FAST added because the driver was converted to use 'fast' interrupts. > > I really hope nobody's going to tell me that INTR_FAST isn't supported with > cardbus. Heh, that probably is the case actually as it proxies the interrupts. -- John Baldwin