Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 15:29:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org> To: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Patch: Defer bus_config_intr() until bus_alloc_resource().. Message-ID: <20040601152758.L30281@root.org> In-Reply-To: <20040601221109.GA21063@ns1.xcllnt.net> References: <200406011531.09077.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <200406011638.04400.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20040601141424.I29932@root.org> <200406011742.57991.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20040601221109.GA21063@ns1.xcllnt.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 1 Jun 2004, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 05:42:57PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > > > > > > I need the patch below in order to turn on bus_config_intr() when > > > > > > using the I/O APICs. > *snip* > > > > > I appreciate what you're trying to do but I don't like this approach. > *snip* > > > > Well, arguably it exposes an improper layering violation when > > > > bus_config_intr() was added. > *snip* > > > I still don't like this. > *snip* > > FreeBSD has no format for this and I don't really have time to add multiple > > resource types (which is what ACPI does, and probably what we will need to do > > eventually) to struct resource. > > Ok, let's relax for a minute. Clearly, the addition of bus_config_intr() > was done in a biggest-bang-for-the-buck approach and I think we can > assume for now that it's there in a way that isn't easily extensible. > > So, the root problem now is that we need to consume the ACPI info in > a way that makes it available for later use, i.e., when we actually > allocate the IRQ resource. The solution needs to be simple so that > jhb@ can close the immediate problem and it should also be a step in > the right direction, or at least not a step in the opposite direction, > so that njl@ doesn't get cornered by it at some later time. Yes, exactly. > Let me give the numbers: > o We need 2 bits for the polarity, > o We need 2 bits for the trigger mode, > o r_flags is 32 bits of which only 16 are in use. > > Can we not stick the IRQ properties in r_flags, just like we > stick the alignment properties there, remove bus_config_intr() > and make sure the MD backend queries the flags for polarity and > trigger (0 values will mean "default" and thus preserve backward > compatibility)? > > This change should only affect 2 places: the place where we set > the resource and the place where we actually install the interrupt > and its handler. It's roughly in line with what jhb@ wants to achieve > and I think it removes the code that njl@ is objecting to the most, > right? This is an excellent idea. -Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040601152758.L30281>