irq: irq and pci_ids patch for Intel DH89xxCC DeviceIDs

This patch adds the LPC Controller DeviceIDs for the Intel DH89xxCC PCH.

Signed-off-by Seth Heasley <[email protected]>

include/linux/pci_ids.h renamed from include/linux/pci_ids.h.orig +3 -0

@@ -2469,6 +2469,9 @@
 #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_COUGARPOINT_LPC_MAX	0x1c5f
 #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PATSBURG_SMBUS	0x1d22
 #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PATSBURG_LPC	0x1d40
+#define PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_DH89XXCC_LPC_MIN	0x2310
+#define PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_DH89XXCC_LPC_MAX	0x231f
+#define PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_DH89XXCC_SMBUS	0x2330
 #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_82801AA_0	0x2410
 #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_82801AA_1	0x2411
 #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_82801AA_3	0x2413

arch/x86/pci/irq.c renamed from arch/x86/pci/irq.c.orig +0 -0

@@ -611,6 +611,15 @@
 		r->set = pirq_piix_set;
 		return 1;

arch/x86/pci/irq.c renamed from arch/x86/pci/irq.c.orig +0 -0

 	return 0;
 }

Quoted 1 line

--- linux-2.6.37/arch/x86/pci/irq.c.orig 2011-01-04

16:50:19.000000000 -0800

Quoted 1 line

+++ linux-2.6.37/arch/x86/pci/irq.c 2011-01-06 14:16:00.000000000

-0800

Quoted 10 lines

arch/x86/pci/irq.c renamed from arch/x86/pci/irq.c.orig +6 -0

@@ -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;

arch/x86/pci/irq.c line 622

Quoted 3 lines

arch/x86/pci/irq.c renamed from arch/x86/pci/irq.c.orig +3 -0

+		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.

Quoted 14 lines

Quoted 1 line

--- linux-2.6.37/arch/x86/pci/irq.c.orig 2011-01-04

16:50:19.000000000 -0800

Quoted 1 line

+++ linux-2.6.37/arch/x86/pci/irq.c 2011-01-06 14:16:00.000000000

-0800

Quoted 10 lines

arch/x86/pci/irq.c renamed from arch/x86/pci/irq.c.orig +6 -0

@@ -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;

Quoted 8 lines

arch/x86/pci/irq.c line 622

Quoted 3 lines

arch/x86/pci/irq.c renamed from arch/x86/pci/irq.c.orig +3 -0

+		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.

Quoted 1 line

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.

I understand the need to have separate blocks for separate IDs and for ID ranges. But all the ranges could be covered by the same block:

	if ((device >= PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_5_3400_SERIES_LPC_MIN &&
	     device <= PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_5_3400_SERIES_LPC_MAX)
	 || (device >= PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_COUGARPOINT_LPC_MIN &&
	     device <= PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_COUGARPOINT_LPC_MAX)) {
		r->name = "PIIX/ICH";
		r->get = pirq_piix_get;
		r->set = pirq_piix_set;
		return 1;
	}