Bug? PCI link device _SRS

[John Baldwin]

On Friday 28 May 2004 01:00 pm, Nate Lawson wrote:
> John, great to see you're working on a lot of these already.  Appreciate
> it.
>
> On Fri, 28 May 2004, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Thursday 27 May 2004 04:55 pm, Brown, Len wrote:
> > >    If a platform gives you a _CRS IRQ that
> > >    is outside the _PRS list, then do no
> > >    stick with the _CRS -- select
> > >    a new (valid) one from the _PRS list.
> >
> > Ah, I have a patch to do this already that I can commit.
> >
> > >    If a platform gives you a _CRS IRQ that
> > >    is different from the _SRS you just
> > >    invoked.  Assume that the _SRS worked
> > >    and that the _CRS is bogus.
> >
> > Huh, we don't do that type of checking, but we do use _CRS for later
> > devices routed to the same link to see what IRQ they should use.
>
> I think the first one will take care of how we handle this one.  We'll do
> _SRS and ignore the _CRS that comes back.  Later, we go to program a
> device that has the same link and its _CRS will be outside the _PRS list,
> so we'll fall back to selecting a valid one from _PRS.

But what if we chose a different IRQ?  Then the routing for the earlier device 
would be wrong.  acpi_pcib_route_interrupt() needs to work with the pci_link 
code more closely, and we should cache the current IRQ in the softc and use 
that to determine if it is routed rather than _CRS I think.  This is how the 
new $PIR code works.

-- 
John Baldwin <jhb at FreeBSD.org>  <><  http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve"  =  http://www.FreeBSD.org