On 3/7/06, Bjorn Helgaas <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 March 2006 07:21, linux-os (Dick Johnson) wrote:
> Maybe you could handle this with a PCI quirk that runs before
> pci_enable_device(). IIRC, we considered exposing a separate
> interface for PCI IRQ allocation and routing, but decided it
> wasn't worth the complexity since so few devices would need it.
>
> > Linux-2.4.x had IRQs that were stable. One could put
> > a handler in place that would handle the possible burst of interrupts
> > upon startup. Then this was changed so the IRQ value is wrong
> > until an unrelated and illogical event occurs.
>
> There are good reasons to wait to allocate the IRQ until you have
> a driver that cares about the device. I'm sorry that this broke
> your specific case.
FWIW, I'd be interested in following up on something like this in
another thread because e100 appears to have (at least in one
reporter's dual e100 machine) a similar "hardware problem" where a
shared interrupt line gets asserted too early and the kernel prints a
Nobody Cared message.
So we have a new way of doing things that exposes more broken
hardware, shouldn't we provide a way for that hardware to continue
working?
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5918
Jesse
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
