IRQ 2 problem

[M. Warner Losh]

In message: <XFMail.20040102132720.jhb at FreeBSD.org>
            John Baldwin <jhb at FreeBSD.org> writes:
: On 02-Jan-2004 M. Warner Losh wrote:
: > In message: <XFMail.20040102113123.jhb at FreeBSD.org>
: >             John Baldwin <jhb at FreeBSD.org> writes:
: >: > It looks like IRQ2 isn't registered as an interrupt source, so when we
: >: > create the resource map, it looks like we skip it and shouldn't be
: >: > handing it out...
: >: 
: >: Yes, it doesn't exist as a valid IRQ in the irq map anymore.  Oh, but you
: >: know what, the resource manager is really buggy in this respect.  For example,
: >: on my system here:
: >: 
: >: Interrupt request lines:
: >:     0x0 (root0)
: >:     0x1 (atkbd0)
: >:     0x2 (root0)
: >:     0x3 (sio1)
: >:     0x4 (sio0)
: >:     0x5-0x8 (root0)
: >:     0x9 (acpi0)
: >:     0xa-0xb (root0)
: >:     0xc (psm0)
: >:     0xd (npx0)
: >:     0xe (ata0)
: >:     0xf (ata1)
: >:     0x10 (uhci0)
: >:     0x11 (sis0)
: >:     0x12 (uhci2)
: >:     0x13 (uhci1)
: >:     0x14 (fxp0)
: >:     0x15-0x17 (root0)
: >: 
: >: Note that the nexus didn't add IRQ 2 as a possible resource, but the
: >: resource manager went ahead and added it anyway when the adjacent
: >: regions were added.  Someone should fix the resource manager code
: >: perhaps.
: > 
: > Interesting.  Of course the default behavior for the devinfo stuff is
: > to say that root owns it, so I'm not 100% convinced that it is a bug
: > in the resource manager, necessarily...  It fails to report shared
: > resources correctly, but they are none-the-less allocated correctly.
: > 
: > I'm curious why the new PIC driver doesn't allocate IRQ 2 itself...
: 
: It does it by not making it available in the first place.

I'd have expected it to be more like:

Interrupt request lines:
...
     0x2 (atpic0)
...

Warner