Re: [PATCH] deal with lack of acpi prt entries gracefully

[Jesse Barnes]

On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 10:13:13PM +0100, Andrew de Quincey wrote:
> > That might work, though I'll be using the ACPI namespace to drive PCI
> > discovery soon (hacking the PROM now).  Maybe I should add some MADT and
> > _PRT entries while I'm at it?  The problem is that we don't support
> > IOAPIC or IOSAPIC interrupt models/hw registers.
> 
> Which base architecture do you use? x86 and x86_64 ACPI now both support PIC 
> based interrupt models.. as thats the only other option AFAIK (It tries 
> IOAPIC first, then if that fails, it drops back to trying PIC mode).

None of the above.  We have our own NUMAlink based interrupt protocol
model.

> > > 2) If ACPI is enabled, and enters the function you patched, code further
> > > in checks if the routing tables have any entries. If not, it rejects the
> > > attempt.
> >
> > That would work I guess.
> 
> Cool, well if it doesn't work, at least we know exactly what to fix.

Yeah, I found the problem pretty quickly last time, so I'm ok with
retesting once your patch goes in.

Thanks,
Jesse
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/