Still IRQ routing problems with bridged devices.

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

On Tue, Jan 06, 2004 at 12:39:42AM +0100, Bernd Walter wrote:
> 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.

After rethinking - it wouldn't be a good idea either, because
GENERIC.hints would block to many possible IRQs :(
Too bad that ISA components have to be attached after PCI.

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