>>> On 23.02.16 at 12:22, <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote: > Patches 1 and 2 are meant to go in. Patch 3 is a prerequisite to patch > 4 and may go in as well, but patch 4 is RFC because with the Pericom > board I have MSI doesn't appear to function. Since it also does not > work in baremetal Linux when doing the trivial adjustments needed in > its driver, I suspect the feature doesn't work in general, which is > supported by the observation that the device continues to assert > INTx despite the MSI enable bit being set (causing unclaimed IRQs > until that IRQ gets shut off). While I got some responses back from > Pericom support, no actual statement of whether MSI is actually > known to work on their boards was ever made by them. I _think_ > patch 4 is correct (and hence could go in), but I have no way of > proving this by testing. > > 1: ns16550: store pointer to config parameters for PCI > 2: ns16550: enable Pericom controller support > 3: console: adjust IRQ initialization > 4: ns16550: enable use of PCI MSI > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> > > (Konrad, I'd appreciate if you could double check that I didn't > accidentally break the Oxford controller support.) > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
