From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 29 18:15:07 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 5FD7E16A423 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2006 18:15:07 +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 00CE143D5E for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2006 18:15:04 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from localhost (john@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by server.baldwin.cx (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k2TIEt06081789; Wed, 29 Mar 2006 13:15:00 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) From: John Baldwin To: Scott Long Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 13:15:54 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <20060329020527.f8f087a4.conrads@cox.net> <200603291157.54467.jhb@freebsd.org> <442ABF1B.5040305@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <442ABF1B.5040305@samsco.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200603291315.56671.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.87.1/1361/Wed Mar 29 01:50:38 2006 on server.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=4.2 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on server.baldwin.cx Cc: Bruce M Simpson , "Conrad J. Sabatier" , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: device atpic to be deprecated? 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: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 18:15:07 -0000 On Wednesday 29 March 2006 12:08, Scott Long wrote: > John Baldwin wrote: > > On Wednesday 29 March 2006 11:26, Scott Long wrote: > > > >>John Baldwin wrote: > >> > >>>On Wednesday 29 March 2006 03:51 am, Bruce M Simpson wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 02:05:27AM -0600, Conrad J. Sabatier wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>Is the plan still in effect to abolish this device? > >>>> > >>>>To my mind it wouldn't make much sense, given the sheer amount of hardware > >>>>out there which doesn't have an IOAPIC, then again I'm probably out of > >>>>touch with the state of interrupt handling in -CURRENT. > >>> > >>> > >>>All amd64 machines (which is where atpic would be removed) have an APIC. > >>> > >> > >>That's kind of like saying that ISA will be removed because there is PCI > >>=-) Having an APIC doesn't necessarily guarantee that it works. There > >>have been enough reports of problems on the mailing lists over time that > >>I think it's a bit premature to declare the ATPIC dead. Also, is the > >>ATPIC code in amd64 causing problems, holding back progress, or creating > >>a maintenance burden? > > > > > > I think that once the lapic timer stuff was added almost all of the APIC > > issues I was aware of went away on amd64 that were fixed by using device > > atpic instead. Most of the earlier problems were due to chipsets not > > setting up pin 0 as extint, etc. but all that is no longer relevant when > > we switched to using the lapic timer and stopped using irq0 and irq8 with > > APIC. This is the first I've heard since the lapic timer stuff that APIC > > didn't work on an amd64 box, and device atpic has been off by default in > > HEAD for quite a while now. If we were able to require APIC on amd64, then > > we might be able to try out some optimizations and other things I haven't > > bothered with since they wouldn't be feasible on i386. > > > > Fine, remove it. I have to make sure it really works for everyone first though before removing it would really be viable. :-/ -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org