http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6049

[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Owner|[EMAIL PROTECTED]         |[EMAIL PROTECTED]
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
            Summary|no acpi interrupt unless    |no acpi interrupt with
                   |ec_intr=0                   |IOunless ec_intr=0



------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-02-12 22:51 -------
Why is pci=noacpi being used?

As documented in bug 2742, you're lucky to get
any ACPI interrupts at all in IOAPIC mode when
you disable ACPI for interrupt configuration.

This is because with ACPI not around to handle it,
the interrupt source override in your MADT gets ignored:
ACPI: INT_SRC_OVR (bus 0 bus_irq 9 global_irq 9 high level)

Which says that the SCI should be HIGH LEVEL,
but as your note on LKML showed, you're running
with the SCI unconfigured, so it is still
in legacy EDGE mode:
   9:          1    IO-APIC-edge  acpi

I don't understand why ec_intr=0 works around
this mis-configured system, but that isn't the
real problem.  The real problem is that this
system is booted with pci=noacpi in IOAPIC mode.

I expect if you boot with "pci=noacpi" and "noapic"
together, then this system will work no matter
how the EC is set up, yes?




------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
acpi-bugzilla mailing list
acpi-bugzilla@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/acpi-bugzilla

Reply via email to