Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752442AbXA1PlX (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Jan 2007 10:41:23 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752443AbXA1PlX (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Jan 2007 10:41:23 -0500 Received: from mo-p07-ob.rzone.de ([81.169.146.188]:22567 "EHLO mo-p07-ob.rzone.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752442AbXA1PlW (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Jan 2007 10:41:22 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 374 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Sun, 28 Jan 2007 10:41:22 EST Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 16:35:06 +0100 (MET) To: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: Bugfixes: PCI devices get assigned redundant IRQs From: "Andreas Block" Cc: "Xavier Bestel" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Andreas Block" Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=iso-8859-15 MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1169809255.10952.178.camel@frg-rhel40-em64t-03> <45BC5919.8030004@zytor.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <45BC5919.8030004@zytor.com> User-Agent: Opera Mail/9.10 (Win32) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1601 Lines: 31 Am Sun, 28 Jan 2007 09:04:41 +0100 schrieb H. Peter Anvin : > I think you're confusing the Interrupt Line register and the Interrupt > Pin register. The Interrupt Line register is platform-dependent, but on > x86 platforms it generally contains the IRQ number (and IRQ 0 is valid, > although in practice it is never used since IRQ 0 is the system timer > and is never connected to the PCI bus), or 255 meaning "none" -- see the > footnote on page 223 of the PCI 3.0 spec. No, I don't think so. I meant the PCI Interrupt Pin register and not the Interrupt line register. I do know, that the latter contains a platform dependent interrupt assignment. In the former a device states which interrupt "trace" the device is connected to (Int A-D). Perhaps you take at look at the code, I think, it's dealing with the register I described (Interrupt pin). Linus stated his opinion about the patch and thinks, it should be well tested in -mm kernel, because it might break devices, which do not comply to the PCI spec. I second that. If there're indeed devices out there, which violate the spec in this point, the patch would hurt more, than it's doing any good. As I wrote in my first message, the consequences of this rather small bug (if it is one and not a workaround for bad devices) are harmless. Regards, Andreas - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/