On Sat, Jun 07, 2003 at 01:08:12PM +0200, Jens Rehsack wrote:
> dmesg of machine which now runs with the fix:
> npx0: on motherboard
> npx0: INT 16 interface
> pcibios: BIOS version 2.10
> pcib0: at pcibus 0 on motherboard
Same situtation with my Board - no $PIR table.
This is how it should loo
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Jens Rehsack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: On 6/6/2003 9:29 PM, Bernd Walter wrote:
: > On Fri, Jun 06, 2003 at 01:17:43PM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote:
: >> In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: >> Bernd Walter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: >> : I
On 6/6/2003 9:29 PM, Bernd Walter wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 06, 2003 at 01:17:43PM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote:
>> In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Bernd Walter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> : I already wondered how you could route interrupts without ACPI until I
>> : booted my printserve
On Fri, Jun 06, 2003 at 01:17:43PM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Bernd Walter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> : I already wondered how you could route interrupts without ACPI until I
> : booted my printserver with a recent kernel.
>
> PCIBIOS!
Well - I
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Bernd Walter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: I already wondered how you could route interrupts without ACPI until I
: booted my printserver with a recent kernel.
PCIBIOS!
Warner
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing lis
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Bernd Walter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: On Fri, Jun 06, 2003 at 12:36:54PM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote:
: > In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: > John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: > : I have a small tweak to the PCI code that re-rout
On Fri, Jun 06, 2003 at 03:04:43PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> On 06-Jun-2003 M. Warner Losh wrote:
> > In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Also, we haven't
> > recorded our info in the underlying pci register. Don't know if that
> > wi
On Fri, Jun 06, 2003 at 12:36:54PM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote:
> In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> : I have a small tweak to the PCI code that re-routes PCI interrupts.
> : Basically, it does two things, 1) make the comment less ia64-specific
On Fri, Jun 06, 2003 at 02:13:31PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> I have a small tweak to the PCI code that re-routes PCI interrupts.
> Basically, it does two things, 1) make the comment less ia64-specific
> and 2) if the interrupt route returns an invalid IRQ (i.e. 255), then
> we don't change the i
On 06-Jun-2003 M. Warner Losh wrote:
> In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>: I have a small tweak to the PCI code that re-routes PCI interrupts.
>: Basically, it does two things, 1) make the comment less ia64-specific
>: and 2) if the interrupt r
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: I have a small tweak to the PCI code that re-routes PCI interrupts.
: Basically, it does two things, 1) make the comment less ia64-specific
: and 2) if the interrupt route returns an invalid IRQ (i.e. 255), then
On Fri, Jun 06, 2003 at 02:13:31PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> I have a small tweak to the PCI code that re-routes PCI interrupts.
> Basically, it does two things, 1) make the comment less ia64-specific
> and 2) if the interrupt route returns an invalid IRQ (i.e. 255), then
> we don't change the i
I have a small tweak to the PCI code that re-routes PCI interrupts.
Basically, it does two things, 1) make the comment less ia64-specific
and 2) if the interrupt route returns an invalid IRQ (i.e. 255), then
we don't change the intline. In other words, if we can't route the
interrupt, we just assu
13 matches
Mail list logo
