On Sun, 11 Feb 2007, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > 2.15.2 PCI Express* Legacy INTx Support and Boot Interrupt > > http://download.intel.com/design/chipsets/datashts/30262802.pdf > > Ouch. And this kind of thing isn't exactly uncommon. > > However if we have the irqs also disabled in the i8259 we should > be safe from actually receiving this interrupt (even if it generates > bus traffic), and when we enable the irq since it is level triggered > we should still get an interrupt message. > > It isn't immediately obvious where the i8259 irq enable/disable > happens. So i"m having trouble auditing that bit of code. > > Plus we can get very strange things like the irq number changing > and the sharing rules being different when going through the i8259. > So irqN may be irqM when going through the i8259. > > As long as we aren't using anything on the i8259 including the timer > in ExtINT mode we can disable every interrupt pin and not worry about > interrupts from that source. We do the 8259 mask in setup_IO_APIC_irq. does anyone have access to an E7520/E7320 system for testing? Cheers, Zwane - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: What are the real ioapic rte programming constraints?
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: What are the real ioapic rte programming constraints?
- References:
- Re: System crash after "No irq handler for vector" linux 2.6.19
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- [PATCH 1/2] x86_64 irq: Simplfy __assign_irq_vector
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- [PATCH 2/2] x86_64 irq: Handle irqs pending in IRR during irq migration.
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86_64 irq: Handle irqs pending in IRR during irq migration.
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86_64 irq: Handle irqs pending in IRR during irq migration.
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86_64 irq: Handle irqs pending in IRR during irq migration.
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86_64 irq: Handle irqs pending in IRR during irq migration.
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86_64 irq: Handle irqs pending in IRR during irq migration.
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86_64 irq: Handle irqs pending in IRR during irq migration.
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- What are the real ioapic rte programming constraints?
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: What are the real ioapic rte programming constraints?
- From: Zwane Mwaikambo <[email protected]>
- Re: What are the real ioapic rte programming constraints?
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: What are the real ioapic rte programming constraints?
- From: Zwane Mwaikambo <[email protected]>
- Re: What are the real ioapic rte programming constraints?
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: System crash after "No irq handler for vector" linux 2.6.19
- Prev by Date: Re: NAK new drivers without proper power management?
- Next by Date: BUG: at fs/nfs/pagelist.c:339 nfs_scan_dirty()
- Previous by thread: Re: What are the real ioapic rte programming constraints?
- Next by thread: Re: What are the real ioapic rte programming constraints?
- Index(es):