Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 20:41:19 +0800 From: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Cc: smp@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Testers please! Message-ID: <19990920124119.509B71CC5@overcee.netplex.com.au> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 20 Sep 1999 09:53:32 %2B0200." <21170.937814012@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
> Ok, noted. I changed to to fail the probe but still use the hardware.
If intpm is probed first (the smbus driver), your probe won't even get
called. I think we need an early quirks or hooks handler in the pci probes
to handle stuff like this. For example, we have hooks fixing up a handful
of wierd bios misconfigurations, collecting these together via a quirks
table or whatever would also give a convenient place for you to hook this
sort of thing into, and without it being dependent on link or probe order.
> Poul-Henning
>
> In message <19990920012447.C1C1B1CC5@overcee.netplex.com.au>, Peter Wemm writ
es
> :
> >Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> >>
> >> If you have a PIIX4 based SMP system and run current, could you
> >> please try out this patch:
> >>
> >> http://phk.freebsd.dk/piix/
> >>
> >> I'm very interested in hearing if there are any measurable difference
> >> apart from clock granularity being 3 times better.
> >
> >There is a problem with it as it tries to claim the same device as claimed
> >by pcisupport.c and intpm.c.. pcisupport.c is where some folks have been
> >hanging Tor Egge's RTC SMI trap patch from..
Cheers,
-Peter
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990920124119.509B71CC5>