Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 22:37:05 -0600 (MDT) From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> Cc: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, mobile@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Patches from -current for -stable I'd like to commit after testing Message-ID: <199710220437.WAA08864@rocky.mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <199710220428.NAA01198@word.smith.net.au> References: <199710220418.WAA08580@rocky.mt.sri.com> <199710220428.NAA01198@word.smith.net.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > (One killer is that the code now allocates IRQ 11 by default for the > > > pcic, but IRQ 11 is used by "something" else that's not probed. > > > > I changed the code to use the 'highest' un-allocated IRQ, because that's > > what Win95 does and many machines used built-in IRQ's for IRQ 3. > > Understood entirely; all I meant was that you moved the problem from > your machine to mine. 8) Actually, I never had a problem, but many users complained to me about this. And, it made sense because Win95 'does it this way', and they are the reference implementation. > > > There > > > needs to be a mechanism for explicitly specifying an IRQ for the pcic.) > > > > Yes, there does. But, because of the current 'ISA' leanings of the > > configuration, there isn't an easy way. > > I hacked an option into kern_intr that allows you to specify a mask of > interrupts that can never be allowed on the system; this seemed to > work pretty well. It's an option, but it still doesn't allow you to specify the interrupt. > > In the meantime, you could try backing out the change I made to see if > > things start working again. > > I did that; it didn't help. I need to spend some more time chasing > kernel builds; I just don't have that right now. (Assignments, exams, > new product lagging on a solid deadline...) *sigh* Does your laptop have a Cirrus Logic controller? Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199710220437.WAA08864>