I might say that NT, the other half of my 486 is quite content with the
disposition of the I/O card, even with the ( I personnaly didn't know it was
set at ) strange IRQ setting. One does not understand why the current set of
kernels could not do the same!
I dont understand where the problems could crop up. If I were to try to detect
the IRQ for each of the well know Serial I/O addresses, I would simply
redirect the interrupt vectors ( temporarily ) to addresses that I am aware
of. This appears to be exceedingly simple, but I suppose the concept of
modules, may make that dangerous to do.
Has the kernel addressed IRQ daisy chaining ? or is still 1 IRQ/device.
gat
tytso@mit.edu wrote:
> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 13:16:02 -0500
> From: Uncle George <gatgul@voicenet.com>
>
> Apparently my ttyS1 had an IRQ if 5 ( rather than the usual setting of
> IRQ 3 ). It seems that the serial driver does not really detect the IRQ
> I used to try to make IRQ autodetection work, but it turned out to be
> causing more failures than it saved, due to the fact that PC hardware
> manufacturer's are unbearably sloppy about implementing everything under
> them.
>
> - Ted
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 15 2000 - 21:00:29 EST