From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2002 12:14:24 -0700 From: Tom Rini To: Anders Blomdell Cc: Hollis Blanchard , linuxppc embedded Subject: Re: Problems with 2_4_devel & MVME2600 serial interrupts Message-ID: <20021019191424.GB722@opus.bloom.county> References: <1034954142.8169.91.camel@granite.austin.ibm.com> <20021018200355.GD6941@opus.bloom.county> <1035052555.1506.10.camel@maj.hemma> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1035052555.1506.10.camel@maj.hemma> Sender: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 08:35:52PM +0200, Anders Blomdell wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 05:47:32PM +0200, Anders Blomdell wrote: > > > > > > >Seems to me that either: > > > >a) the pci_intack value is incorrect for your board, in which case you > > > >should correct it > > > Shure is, question is if it really should be caught from the pci_intack > > > register, as far as I can understand from the MVME2600 doc's, the 8259 > > > interrupt generates a MPIC-IRQ0, but one has to poll the 8259 to find out > > > what device it was that generated the interrupt. > > > > Are you running this as CONFIG_ALL_PPC? IIRC, under 2_4_devel, this > > board should work as CONFIG_PPLUS. Or it will need minor fixups, which > > I have described previously on the lists (and possibly to you as well) > > for the OpenPIC table. > CONFIG_ALL_PPC, yes. > > > > > >b) your board's int-ack feature is broken and you'll need to poll > > > > > > Perhaps an extra field in the 'mot_info' (arch/ppc/platforms/prep_pci.c) is > > > called for? This line in prep_init_IRQ (arch/ppc/platforms/prep_setup.c): > > > > > > i8259_init(0xbffffff0); /* PCI interrupt ack address for MPC105 and 106 > > > */ > > > > > > does not look like a general solution. > > > > Well, it's a correct solution for the PReP like PReP machines. Where in > > the continium does the MVME2600 fall exactly? > > MPC105/MPC106/Raven/Hawk/Falcon ? I _think_ this is an example of why > > it would really be nice to kill PPLUS support from PReP. But I know > > that will upset some people, so I'm not advocating that for 2.4, and it > > looks like we might have to do something similar to the MPC10x test in > > the PReP bootwrapper code in 2.5 (and maybe 2.4? I'm not at home, so I > > can't easily check). > It's a Raven equipped card, and as far as I can find, the 8259 > interrupts acks are not accessible from any other adress. I'll look > further into this on monday... Any address other than what? If i8259_init is passed 0, then we poll, instead of asking the int-ack. -- Tom Rini (TR1265) http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/ ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/