On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Matthew Galgoci wrote:
>
> I do however still recieve a nasty message about a pirq table
> conflict, but it does not seem to affect the operation of the
> card.
It doesn't.
> The pirq conflict message seems a little harsh though, and perhaps
> unnecessary.
It is a bit harsh, and while not unnecessary I'll have to do something
about it.
What is going on is that a lot of laptops appear to have a pirq routing
table for PCI bus #1 (and sometimes #2), even though that bus does not
actually exist in hardware at all. My suspicion is that the BIOS writers
just re-use the same pirq table over and over again, and that it's just a
remnant of the fact that some laptops have either a docking station bus or
an AGP bus as bus #1.
When Linux assigns bus #1 to the CardBus bridge, those bogus entries in
the pirq routing table will show up as conflicts. They'll be ignored, but
it's still a nasty message.
The problem is that the message probably _should_ be printed for the real
case of a misconfigured BIOS, if for no other reason than to try to track
down what the h*ll is going on.
My tentative fix for this would be to make Linux never assign bus #1 or #2
to a cardbus bridge, and start cardbus bridges at bus #8 or something like
that. That way we'd still catch any strangeness in the pirq table, but we
wouldn't get the message for this case which seems to be very common.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Dec 15 2000 - 21:00:22 EST