在 2009-05-20三的 10:28 +0800，yanh写道：
> 在 2009-05-19二的 17:01 +0100，Ralf Baechle写道：
> > On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 10:37:17AM +0800, yanh wrote:
> >
> > > > The semantic of inX() / outX() is defined by the x86 architecture which
> > > > forbids posting I/O port writes. In short I think this one is papering
> > > > over a bug in the outX() implementation.
> > > Yes, the outX should do a delayed write, however it does not.
> > > So our solution is making a read to flush the write.
> >
> > Do you actually need all the inb() you added to get things to work or is
>
> Thanks for your reply.
> As my test, if there is no the read, there will be many spurious irqs.
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/i8259.c b/arch/mips/kernel/i8259.c
> > index 01c0885..42d75d7 100644
> > --- a/arch/mips/kernel/i8259.c
> > +++ b/arch/mips/kernel/i8259.c
> > @@ -177,10 +177,12 @@ handle_real_irq:
> > outb(cached_slave_mask, PIC_SLAVE_IMR);
> > outb(0x60+(irq&7), PIC_SLAVE_CMD);/* 'Specific EOI' to slave */
> > outb(0x60+PIC_CASCADE_IR, PIC_MASTER_CMD); /* 'Specific EOI' to master-IRQ2 */
> > + inb(PIC_MASTER_CMD);
> > } else {
> > inb(PIC_MASTER_IMR); /* DUMMY - (do we need this?) */
> > outb(cached_master_mask, PIC_MASTER_IMR);
> > outb(0x60+irq, PIC_MASTER_CMD); /* 'Specific EOI to master */
> > + inb(PIC_MASTER_CMD);
> > }
> > smtc_im_ack_irq(irq);
> > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&i8259A_lock, flags);
> >
> > sufficient to solve the problem?
> I have test this patch just now. It works well on yeeloong.
> I have one question what's the difference between the two patch?
My original patch only flush imr write. Really only one read is suffient. So no question about it now.
> >
> > Ralf
>
>
