Still IRQ routing problems with bridged devices.

[ticso at cicely12.cicely.de (Bernd Walter)]

On Mon, Jan 05, 2004 at 04:33:45PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> In message: <20040105233138_(_dot_)_GR17023_(_at_)_cicely12_(_dot_)_cicely_(_dot_)_de>
>             Bernd Walter <ticso_(_at_)_cicely12_(_dot_)_cicely_(_dot_)_de> writes:
> : On Mon, Jan 05, 2004 at 04:24:27PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> : > In message: <20040105231533_(_dot_)_GQ17023_(_at_)_cicely12_(_dot_)_cicely_(_dot_)_de>
> : >             Bernd Walter <ticso_(_at_)_cicely12_(_dot_)_cicely_(_dot_)_de> writes:
> : > : The point is that it shouldn't take an IRQ for PCI which is configured
> : > : for an ISA device in device.hints.
> : > 
> : > We don't do that.
> : 
> : We do!
> : 
> : /boot/device.hints:
> : hint.sio.0.irq="4"
> : 
> : pci_cfgintr_virgin: using routable interrupt 4
> : pci_cfgintr: 0:4 INTD routed to irq 4
> 
> Ah, I see what you are saying.  That would be hard to implement.

I already worried about this.
The BIOS has an implied veto for IRQ4 because it know this onboard
device and you could add veto IRQs for additional ISA components.
This table has no influence on FreeBSD.

-- 
B.Walter                   BWCT                http://www.bwct.de
ticso_(_at_)_bwct_(_dot_)_de                                  info_(_at_)_bwct_(_dot_)_de