IRQ assignment on my IBM X24
ron minnich
rminnich at lanl.gov
Mon Apr 7 09:52:00 CEST 2003
On 6 Apr 2003, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> ron minnich <rminnich at lanl.gov> writes:
>
> > this seems really poor bios design:
> > @mini rminnich]# lspci -v -v | grep Interrupt
> > Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 11
> > Interrupt: pin B routed to IRQ 11
> > Interrupt: pin C routed to IRQ 11
> > Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 11
> > Interrupt: pin B routed to IRQ 11
> > Interrupt: pin B routed to IRQ 11
> > Interrupt: pin B routed to IRQ 11
> > Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 11
> > Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 11
> > Interrupt: pin B routed to IRQ 11
> > Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 11
> > Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 11
> >
> > Pretty much everyone goes to IRQ 11.
> >
> > And a bunch of Interrupts go unused:
> >
> > CPU0
> > 0: 3381694 XT-PIC timer
> > 1: 13873 XT-PIC keyboard
> > 2: 0 XT-PIC cascade
> > 8: 1 XT-PIC rtc
> > 11: 77842 XT-PIC usb-uhci, usb-uhci, usb-uhci, eth0,
> > wlan0, Ricoh Co Ltd RL5c476 II, Ricoh Co Ltd RL5c476 II (#2)
> > 12: 360259 XT-PIC PS/2 Mouse
> > 14: 85559 XT-PIC ide0
> > NMI: 0
> > ERR: 0
> >
> >
> > Is there any reason a BIOS would do this?
>
> The motherboard is a lousy design. Only vary rarely
> have I not seen the basic irq assignments come down to traces
> on the motherboard.
what's worse is the PIR table claims that lots more interrupts are
available. Sad, really.
ron
More information about the coreboot
mailing list