Applied.
thanks,
-Len
On Thu, 2005-03-24 at 13:24, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 13:40 -0500, Len Brown wrote:
> > But checking skip_ioapic_setup in the non-ACPI case
> > isn't quite right. This is set for "noapic". But
> > it is not set in the PIC-mode case where the kernel
> >
On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 13:40 -0500, Len Brown wrote:
> But checking skip_ioapic_setup in the non-ACPI case
> isn't quite right. This is set for "noapic". But
> it is not set in the PIC-mode case where the kernel
> supports IOAPIC but the hardware does not -- in that
> case the quirk would erroneou
Bjorn,
I like how pci_fixup_device() invokes the quirk
when we want at pci_enable_device() time w/o cluttering
the code with VIA specific hooks.
I think you've also identified an improvement by
checking acpi_irq_model -- as the PCI config space
IRQ register is defined only in PIC-mode -- so one
m
> On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 04:57, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> Great. Shaohua, where should we go from here? Do you have more
>> concerns with the current patch, or should we ask Andrew to put it
>> in -mm? If you do have concerns, would you like to propose an
>> alternate patch that fixes the problem f
On Wed, 2005-03-23 at 04:57, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > Your patch applied with some problems:
> >
> > patching file arch/i386/pci/irq.c
> > Hunk #2 succeeded at 1081 with fuzz 2 (offset 1 line).
> > patching file drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c
> > patching file drivers/pci/quirks.c
> > Hunk #1 succeeded at
> Your patch applied with some problems:
>
> patching file arch/i386/pci/irq.c
> Hunk #2 succeeded at 1081 with fuzz 2 (offset 1 line).
> patching file drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c
> patching file drivers/pci/quirks.c
> Hunk #1 succeeded at 678 (offset -5 lines).
These indicate minor differences in thes
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 11:07 -0700, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
OK. Try this one for size. It differs from what's currently in
the tree in these ways:
- It's a quirk, so we don't have to clutter acpi_pci_irq_enable()
and pirq_enable_irq() with Via-speci
On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 11:07 -0700, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> OK. Try this one for size. It differs from what's currently in
> the tree in these ways:
>
> - It's a quirk, so we don't have to clutter acpi_pci_irq_enable()
> and pirq_enable_irq() with Via-specific code.
>
> - It doesn't
On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 09:09 +0800, Li Shaohua wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 02:08, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 09:33 +0800, Li Shaohua wrote:
> > > The comments in previous quirk said it's required only in PIC mode.
> > ...
> > > I feel we concerned too much. Changing the interr
On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 02:08, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 09:33 +0800, Li Shaohua wrote:
> > The comments in previous quirk said it's required only in PIC mode.
> ...
> > I feel we concerned too much. Changing the interrupt line isn't harmful,
> > right? Linux actually ignored inter
On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 09:33 +0800, Li Shaohua wrote:
> The comments in previous quirk said it's required only in PIC mode.
...
> I feel we concerned too much. Changing the interrupt line isn't harmful,
> right? Linux actually ignored interrupt line. Maybe just a
> PCI_FIXUP_ENABLE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA
Hi,
On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 00:10, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-03-15 at 16:02 -0700, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 Mar 2005, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > That seems awfully suspicious to me. So the following is
> > > probably safe as far as it goes, but not sufficient for all
> > > cas
On Tue, 2005-03-15 at 16:02 -0700, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2005, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > That seems awfully suspicious to me. So the following is
> > probably safe as far as it goes, but not sufficient for all
> > cases.
>
> VIA bridges allow for IRQ routing updates by programmin
Hi Bjorn,
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> That seems awfully suspicious to me. So the following is
> probably safe as far as it goes, but not sufficient for all
> cases.
VIA bridges allow for IRQ routing updates by programming
PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, so it is supposed to work even if w
On Sun, 2005-03-13 at 16:14 +0100, Grzegorz Kulewski wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > So here's another patch to try (revert the first one, then apply this).
> >
> > = drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c 1.37 vs edited =
> > --- 1.37/drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c 2005-03-01 09:57:29 -
D] [mailto:acpi-devel-
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Grzegorz Kulewski
>Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2005 11:15 PM
>To: Bjorn Helgaas
>Cc: Andrew Morton; ACPI List; lkml
>Subject: Re: [ACPI] Re: Fw: Anybody? 2.6.11 (stable and -rc) ACPI
breaks
>USB
>
>On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, Bjorn
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
Can you do an "lspci -vvn"? I'm looking at quirk_via_irqpic() in
2.6.9, which is what printed this:
PCI: Via IRQ fixup for :00:07.2, from 9 to 10
PCI: Via IRQ fixup for :00:07.3, from 9 to 10
but it looks like it should only run for PCI_DEVIC
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
Can you do an "lspci -vvn"?
# lspci -vvn
:00:00.0 Class 0600: 1022:700e (rev 13)
Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop-
ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
Status: Cap+ 66Mhz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbor
Can you do an "lspci -vvn"? I'm looking at quirk_via_irqpic() in
2.6.9, which is what printed this:
> >PCI: Via IRQ fixup for :00:07.2, from 9 to 10
> >PCI: Via IRQ fixup for :00:07.3, from 9 to 10
but it looks like it should only run for PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_82C586_2,
PCI_DEVICE_ID
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Fri, 2005-03-11 at 20:36 +0100, Grzegorz Kulewski wrote:
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
Can you check to see whether there are any BIOS updates available
for your box? It looks to me like your USB controllers are wired
to IRQ9, and that's how
On Fri, 2005-03-11 at 20:36 +0100, Grzegorz Kulewski wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > Can you check to see whether there are any BIOS updates available
> > for your box? It looks to me like your USB controllers are wired
> > to IRQ9, and that's how the BIOS is leaving them co
Hi,
Thanks for your prompt anwser.
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Fri, 2005-03-11 at 00:08 +0100, Grzegorz Kulewski wrote:
Anything new about it?
Can I provide more usefull info?
Can you check to see whether there are any BIOS updates available
for your box? It looks to me like your
On Fri, 2005-03-11 at 00:08 +0100, Grzegorz Kulewski wrote:
> Anything new about it?
>
> Can I provide more usefull info?
Can you check to see whether there are any BIOS updates available
for your box? It looks to me like your USB controllers are wired
to IRQ9, and that's how the BIOS is leaving
23 matches
Mail list logo
