> I think, it is about time, not thinking via quirks as
> workarounds, because all pcis (on via) are quirked, some are
> quirked twice.
> And we should think in programmer interrupts of via chipset,
> in specific function for this propose, for me, doesn't make
> sense every time VIA put other ID out, we have to add quirks
> to this ID , as this was an exception.
>
> Thanks,
VIA's numerous pci quirks are not related to this patch. They only hit
one problem with it having only 4 bits encoding their interrupt.
> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 15:53 -0400, Brown, Len wrote:
> > I'd rather see the original irq-renaming patch and its subsequent
> > multiple via workaround patches reverted than to further complicate
> > what is becoming a fragile mess.
> >
> > -Len
There are probably better ways to control 224 possible IRQs by their
total number instead of their range, and per-cpu IDTs are the better
answer to the IRQ shortage altogether. But just going back to the way it
was wouldn't be right I think. We were able to run 2 generations of
systems only because we had this compression, other big systems
benefited from it as well.
Thanks,
--Natalie
-
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]
