| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 11:48:37 -0400 From: Daniel Drake <dsd@...too.org> To: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> CC: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, akpm@...l.org, torvalds@...l.org, sergio@...giomb.no-ip.org, jeff@...zik.org, cw@...f.org, bjorn.helgaas@...com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, harmon@....edu, len.brown@...el.com, vsu@...linux.ru, liste@...det.net Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] VIA IRQ quirk behaviour change Greg KH wrote: > On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 01:31:12AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: >> VIA have always told me that "ACPI handles this" and we don't need >> quirks. Various chips have different IRQ routing logic and it's all a >> bit weird if we don't use ACPI and/or BIOS routing. > > So why isn't acpi handling all of this for us? Do people not want to > use acpi for some reason? It doesn't appear to be this simple in reality. Chris has reports that indeed enabling ACPI avoids the needs for quirks, but Gentoo have reports that quirks are *only* required in ACPI mode. Sergio is of the opinion that quirks are not required in IO-APIC setups, but Stian has shown that quirks are required on legacy interrupts even with a working IO-APIC setup. Len Brown has some notes to add: http://lists.openwall.net/linux-kernel/2006/07/14/147 Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists