Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 10 Dec 2002 00:27:29 +0100 | From | Vojtech Pavlik <> | Subject | Re: /proc/pci deprecation? |
| |
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 09:00:44AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On 9 Dec 2002, Alan Cox wrote: > > > > I wonder if this is why we have all these problems with VIA chipset > > interrupt handling. According to VIA docs they _do_ use > > PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE on integrated devices to select the IRQ routing > > between APIC and PCI/ISA etc, as well as 0 meaning "IRQ disabled" > > Whee.. That sounds like a load of crock in the first place, since the > PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE thing should be just a scratch register as far as I > know. However, it doesn't really matter - we definitely should never write > to it anyway, so the VIA behaviour while strange should still be > acceptable.
I can confirm that on most builtin VIA southbridge devices (namely USB) the register isn't just a scratch register and that indeed it is used by the interrupt router.
> Anyway, to get back on the original discussion, I think we should remove > the writing, and then make sure that /sbin/lspci (or some other tool) can
I guess only the irq re-routing code specific to VIA would then write those values, because it has to if the BIOS didn't set them up correctly.
> be made to easily show either the kernel irq mapping value _or_ the > "original PCI config space" value. At that point I'd agree that /proc/pci > has outlived its usefulness. > > (Although I still think the name database is nice to have - I certainly > prefer it over having a lot of drivers having their _own_ name databases > for printout purposes).
It definitely made many drivers simpler.
-- Vojtech Pavlik SuSE Labs - 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/
| |