>> --- linux-2.6.37/arch/x86/pci/irq.c.orig 2011-01-04
>16:50:19.000000000 -0800
>> +++ linux-2.6.37/arch/x86/pci/irq.c 2011-01-06 14:16:00.000000000
>-0800
>> @@ -611,6 +611,15 @@
>> r->set = pirq_piix_set;
>> return 1;
>> }
>> +
>> + if ((device >= PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_DH89XXCC_LPC_MIN) &&
>> + (device <= PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_DH89XXCC_LPC_MAX)) {
>> + r->name = "PIIX/ICH";
>> + r->get = pirq_piix_get;
>> + r->set = pirq_piix_set;
>> + return 1;
>> + }
>> +
>
>I'm curious why we have separate sections for INTEL_5_3400_SERIES,
>INTEL_COUGARPOINT and now INTEL_DH89XXCC? We do the same thing for all
>3, so it would make sense to merge the tests to avoid duplicating the
>code.
Some products are defining a range of DeviceIDs rather than one or two specific IDs, so these blocks are for catching any DeviceID in the range. I'm certainly open to suggestion for a better way to handle these, and I agree that the current way is awkward.
-Seth
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
