[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1906141454430.1722@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 15:02:43 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: "Kirkendall, Garrett" <Garrett.Kirkendall@....com>
cc: "nstange@...e.de" <nstange@...e.de>,
"luto@...nel.org" <luto@...nel.org>,
"natechancellor@...il.com" <natechancellor@...il.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c: calibrate_APIC_clock() soft hangs
when PIC is not configured by BIOS before kernel is launched.
Garrett,
On Thu, 9 May 2019, Kirkendall, Garrett wrote:
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
A: No.
Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?
http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top
Also please break the lines around 78 chars.
> 1. Is it correct to probe the 8259 before it is initialized by the
> kernel? The 8259 will not respond properly to the probe unless it is
> properly initialized.
So far the kernel relied on the BIOS to initialize 8259
> 2. Should IOAPIC interrupts 0-15 require the legacy PIC be available and
> initialized by the BIOS?
Unless the platform explicitely states that there is no legacy PIC, which
is true for some MID and HV guest systems.
> 2. The kernel will not boot if there is no legacy 8259 PIC even if all
> the other factors stated are provided.
Hmm? what other factors?
> I want to understand why a preinitialized 8259 is a requirement for a
> system configured to use the IOAPIC?
Mostly historical reasons and the whole PIC/IOAPIC thing has been a fragile
nightmare forever, so I'm reluctant to do any extra work there which might
break older machines.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists