I don't get it. Why are we trying to do such a stupid thing? This hardware behavior is not specific to boot interrupts or Intel. This is the classic x86 ioapic behaviour of redirecting a ioapic irq into a legacy irq when the ioapic entry is disabled. If you really want not to have problems ensure all irqs 0-15 are disabled, and not needed. Otherwise you are taking the chance on something like this happening. Disabling irqs generically appears to be a crap shoot, and not on a path hardware vendors look at or care about heavily. Disabling an irq in hardware on every interrupt, increasing the cost of the interrupt and walking down these neglected hardware paths seems stupid. Especially when the interrupt line might be shared and we can be disabling several devices at once. Is this case really so interesting and compelling that we want to fight through and figure what we need to do to make this work reliably on every x86 chipset? Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
