On 07/20/2010 11:29 AM, Jiri Slaby wrote: > On 07/19/2010 09:19 PM, Robert Hancock wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 10:29 AM, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> I still no point in comparing this to Windows' setup. We can't find out >>>>> whether it is quirked or better (without some bug) handled there. >>>> >>>> Well, you can see if Windows shows IRQ 10 or 11 for that device.. >>> >>> But how can I find out which link it is routed to in Windows? Without >>> that information the number is meaningless, no? >> >> If you look at the pattern of which IRQs are shared by what devices in >> Linux and compare it to Windows you can get a good idea. Normally the >> assignment of devices to interrupt lines is hard-wired on the >> motherboard and doesn't change. > > Ok, thanks for the hint. > > What we've found out is that it works on 2.6.27 (with slightly changed > configuration). No, this was a false alarm. It never worked with acpi irq routing on older kernels in this HW configuration. So, to sum up: 1) acpi routing enabled (no kernel parameter) => ports 4+5 defunct. ports 4+5+6+7 are all on irq 11 2) acpi routing disabled (acpi=noirq) => all ports working, 4+5 on irq 10, 6+7 on irq 11 3) with the quirk [1] and acpi routing enabled => all ports working, ports 4+5 on irq 10, 6+7 on irq 11 4) in windows => 4+5+6+7 are all on irq 9 and the ports are all working. Any ideas what this means? Especially point 4)? [1] http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/6/27/85 thanks, -- js -- 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
