Re: pirq checking

[Stefan Reinauer]

* ron minnich  [040603 17:23]:
> > the current pirq code defines intel_irq_routing_table as const, thus
> > making it potentially readonly.
>
> should be const due to execute-in-place issues.

What's the benefit in this case? we have dram long before this code is
run, and the table is really small. Should it be copied to ram
completely maybe?
> > OTOH the code in arch/i386/boot/pirq_routing.c tries to correct the 
> > checksum and size entries in that table.
>
> that's my fault I bet.

Nope, parts of that is my fault. But I still think it is a good idea to
go towards dynamic table creation.

Well.. maybe this discussion should be left for later..

Stefan