Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 14:24:05 -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.20040102142405.jhb@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20040102.113153.90116271.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.20040102132720.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
> John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> writes:
>: 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.
>
> I'd have expected it to be more like:
>
> Interrupt request lines:
> ...
> 0x2 (atpic0)
> ...
No, I mean it shouldn't exist. It should be:
0x0 (root0) (this is a bug cause clk isn't new-bussed)
0x1 (atkbd0)
0x3 (sio1)
...
--
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.20040102142405.jhb>