PCI id missing from arch/x86/smi.c
Hi,
About a year ago when installing Xenomai on a new box it appeared this particular system required an addition to the PDI IDs table in arch/x86/smi.c. See this thread: https://mail.gna.org/public/xenomai-help/2009-08/msg00031.html
Gilles said he would make the change to smi.c. That was with 2.4.8.
Now I'm trying 2.5.3 but again the same PCI ID is missing. Is there a particular reason not to include this ID? On this system the SMI detection stuff doesn't work without it.
It requires adding this line to rthal_smi_pci_tbl[]:
{PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_ICH10_1)},
Regards,
Theo
Quoted 7 lines · Theo Veenker
Hi,
About a year ago when installing Xenomai on a new box it appeared this particular system required an addition to the PDI IDs table in
arch/x86/smi.c. See this thread: https://mail.gna.org/public/xenomai-help/2009-08/msg00031.html
Gilles said he would make the change tosmi.c. That was with 2.4.8.
Quoted 6 lines
Now I'm trying 2.5.3 but again the same PCI ID is missing. Is there a particular reason not to include this ID? On this system the SMI detection stuff doesn't work without it.
It requires adding this line to rthal_smi_pci_tbl[]:
{PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_ICH10_1)},
No. I simply forgot...
Signature · 1 line
Gilles.
Quoted 7 lines · Theo Veenker
Hi,
About a year ago when installing Xenomai on a new box it appeared this particular system required an addition to the PDI IDs table in
arch/x86/smi.c. See this thread: https://mail.gna.org/public/xenomai-help/2009-08/msg00031.html
Gilles said he would make the change tosmi.c. That was with 2.4.8.
Quoted 6 lines
Now I'm trying 2.5.3 but again the same PCI ID is missing. Is there a particular reason not to include this ID? On this system the SMI detection stuff doesn't work without it.
It requires adding this line to rthal_smi_pci_tbl[]:
{PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_ICH10_1)},
Does the SMI disabling actually work, ie. do you _measure_ any difference? I'm asking as I think to remember that recent (but older than ICH10) Intel chipset no longer provide the required interface or at least changed it in an incompatible way.
Jan
Signature · 2 lines
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1 Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
Quoted 12 lines · Jan Kiszka
Quoted 11 lines · Theo Veenker
Hi,
About a year ago when installing Xenomai on a new box it appeared this particular system required an addition to the PDI IDs table in
arch/x86/smi.c. See this thread: https://mail.gna.org/public/xenomai-help/2009-08/msg00031.html
Gilles said he would make the change tosmi.c. That was with 2.4.8.Now I'm trying 2.5.3 but again the same PCI ID is missing. Is there a particular reason not to include this ID? On this system the SMI detection stuff doesn't work without it.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines
It requires adding this line to rthal_smi_pci_tbl[]:
{PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_ICH10_1)},Does the SMI disabling actually work, ie. do you _measure_ any difference? I'm asking as I think to remember that recent (but older than ICH10) Intel chipset no longer provide the required interface or at least changed it in an incompatible way.
Yes it does. First I got high latencies (~1800us). Then I remembered that I had to disable SMI on this platform, so I recompiled with SMI disabled, to find out it didn't make a difference. In the messages log I saw it didn't say anything about SMI so I looked into it and found out the PCI ID I had in before was gone. I added it and now the SMI workaround works and the high latencies are gone.
Theo
PATCH 1/1 x86: add Intel ICH10_1 to rthal_smi_pci_tbl
patch attached.
Quoted 29 lines · Theo Veenker
Quoted 13 lines · Jan Kiszka
Quoted 11 lines · Theo Veenker
Hi,
About a year ago when installing Xenomai on a new box it appeared this particular system required an addition to the PDI IDs table in
arch/x86/smi.c. See this thread: https://mail.gna.org/public/xenomai-help/2009-08/msg00031.html
Gilles said he would make the change tosmi.c. That was with 2.4.8.Now I'm trying 2.5.3 but again the same PCI ID is missing. Is there a particular reason not to include this ID? On this system the SMI detection stuff doesn't work without it.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
It requires adding this line to rthal_smi_pci_tbl[]:
{PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_ICH10_1)},Does the SMI disabling actually work, ie. do you _measure_ any difference? I'm asking as I think to remember that recent (but older than ICH10) Intel chipset no longer provide the required interface or at least changed it in an incompatible way.
Yes it does. First I got high latencies (~1800us). Then I remembered that I had to disable SMI on this platform, so I recompiled with SMI disabled, to find out it didn't make a difference. In the messages log I saw it didn't say anything about SMI so I looked into it and found out the PCI ID I had in before was gone. I added it and now the SMI workaround works and the high latencies are gone.
Quoted 7 lines
Theo
_______________________________________________
Xenomai-help mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-help
From 79a579bdd8c79d4160733f046b0bc89a9c3ff283 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Stefan Kisdaroczi <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2010 10:45:45 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] x86: add Intel ICH10_1 to rthal_smi_pci_tbl
--- ksrc/arch/x86/smi.c | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
ksrc/arch/x86/smi.c +1 -0
@@ -49,6 +49,7 @@ static struct pci_device_id rthal_smi_pci_tbl[] = { {PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_ICH7_0)}, {PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_ICH7_1)}, {PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_ICH8_4)}, + {PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_ICH10_1)}, {0,}, };
Signature · 1 line
1.7.1
Re: [Xenomai-help] [PATCH] x86: add Intel ICH10_1 to rthal_smi_pci_tbl
Quoted 1 line · Stefan Kisdaroczi
patch attached.
Merged. Thanks.
Signature · 1 line
Gilles.