From owner-freebsd-mobile  Tue Oct 21 21:37:12 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-mobile>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id VAA04442
          for mobile-outgoing; Tue, 21 Oct 1997 21:37:12 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-mobile)
Received: from ns.mt.sri.com (SRI-56K-FR.mt.net [206.127.65.42])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id VAA04432
          for <mobile@freebsd.org>; Tue, 21 Oct 1997 21:37:09 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from nate@rocky.mt.sri.com)
Received: from rocky.mt.sri.com (rocky.mt.sri.com [206.127.76.100])
	by ns.mt.sri.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA27374;
	Tue, 21 Oct 1997 22:37:07 -0600 (MDT)
Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.mt.sri.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id WAA08864; Tue, 21 Oct 1997 22:37:05 -0600 (MDT)
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 1997 22:37:05 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <199710220437.WAA08864@rocky.mt.sri.com>
From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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 
In-Reply-To: <199710220428.NAA01198@word.smith.net.au>
References: <199710220418.WAA08580@rocky.mt.sri.com>
	<199710220428.NAA01198@word.smith.net.au>
X-Mailer: VM 6.29 under 19.15 XEmacs Lucid
Sender: owner-freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> > > (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