On Friday, January 10, 2014 03:52:17 PM al.stone@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> From: Al Stone <al.stone@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> In HW reduced mode, the use of the SCI interrupt is not allowed. In
> all those places that use the FADT sci_interrupt field, make sure we
> do not execute that path when in HW reduced mode.
>
> In the case of acpi_os_install_interrupt_handler() in osl.c, this allows
> us to open up the routine to installing interrupt handlers other than
> acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt regardless of whether we are in ACPI legacy
> mode or reduced HW mode; acpi_os_remove_interrupt_handler() changes to
> maintain symmetry.
>
> Signed-off-by: Al Stone <al.stone@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/acpi/bus.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++--------------
> drivers/acpi/osl.c | 18 +++++++-----------
> drivers/acpi/pci_link.c | 2 ++
> 3 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/bus.c b/drivers/acpi/bus.c
> index 0710004..d871859 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/bus.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/bus.c
> @@ -552,21 +552,23 @@ void __init acpi_early_init(void)
> }
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_X86
> - if (!acpi_ioapic) {
> - /* compatible (0) means level (3) */
> - if (!(acpi_sci_flags & ACPI_MADT_TRIGGER_MASK)) {
> - acpi_sci_flags &= ~ACPI_MADT_TRIGGER_MASK;
> - acpi_sci_flags |= ACPI_MADT_TRIGGER_LEVEL;
I wonder why exactly you want to make this change. It surely doesn't matter
for ARM and do you have any HW-reduced x86 hardware to test it?
> + if (!acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware) {
> + if (!acpi_ioapic) {
> + /* compatible (0) means level (3) */
> + if (!(acpi_sci_flags & ACPI_MADT_TRIGGER_MASK)) {
> + acpi_sci_flags &= ~ACPI_MADT_TRIGGER_MASK;
> + acpi_sci_flags |= ACPI_MADT_TRIGGER_LEVEL;
> + }
> + /* Set PIC-mode SCI trigger type */
> + acpi_pic_sci_set_trigger(acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt,
> + (acpi_sci_flags & ACPI_MADT_TRIGGER_MASK) >> 2);
> + } else {
> + /*
> + * now that acpi_gbl_FADT is initialized,
> + * update it with result from INT_SRC_OVR parsing
> + */
> + acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt = acpi_sci_override_gsi;
> }
> - /* Set PIC-mode SCI trigger type */
> - acpi_pic_sci_set_trigger(acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt,
> - (acpi_sci_flags & ACPI_MADT_TRIGGER_MASK) >> 2);
> - } else {
> - /*
> - * now that acpi_gbl_FADT is initialized,
> - * update it with result from INT_SRC_OVR parsing
> - */
> - acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt = acpi_sci_override_gsi;
> }
> #endif
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/osl.c b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> index 44c07eb..c946a3a 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> @@ -84,6 +84,7 @@ static int (*__acpi_os_prepare_extended_sleep)(u8 sleep_state, u32 val_a,
>
> static acpi_osd_handler acpi_irq_handler;
> static void *acpi_irq_context;
> +static u32 acpi_irq_number;
> static struct workqueue_struct *kacpid_wq;
> static struct workqueue_struct *kacpi_notify_wq;
> static struct workqueue_struct *kacpi_hotplug_wq;
> @@ -178,6 +179,10 @@ static void __init acpi_request_region (struct acpi_generic_address *gas,
>
> static int __init acpi_reserve_resources(void)
> {
> + /* Handle hardware reduced mode: i.e., do nothing. */
> + if (acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware)
> + return 0;
Does it actually break things if we do that?
> +
> acpi_request_region(&acpi_gbl_FADT.xpm1a_event_block, acpi_gbl_FADT.pm1_event_length,
> "ACPI PM1a_EVT_BLK");
>
> @@ -795,13 +800,6 @@ acpi_os_install_interrupt_handler(u32 gsi, acpi_osd_handler handler,
>
> acpi_irq_stats_init();
>
> - /*
> - * ACPI interrupts different from the SCI in our copy of the FADT are
> - * not supported.
> - */
> - if (gsi != acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt)
> - return AE_BAD_PARAMETER;
> -
> if (acpi_irq_handler)
> return AE_ALREADY_ACQUIRED;
>
> @@ -818,15 +816,13 @@ acpi_os_install_interrupt_handler(u32 gsi, acpi_osd_handler handler,
> acpi_irq_handler = NULL;
> return AE_NOT_ACQUIRED;
> }
> + acpi_irq_number = irq;
>
> return AE_OK;
> }
>
> acpi_status acpi_os_remove_interrupt_handler(u32 irq, acpi_osd_handler handler)
> {
> - if (irq != acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt)
> - return AE_BAD_PARAMETER;
> -
> free_irq(irq, acpi_irq);
> acpi_irq_handler = NULL;
>
> @@ -1806,7 +1802,7 @@ acpi_status __init acpi_os_initialize1(void)
> acpi_status acpi_os_terminate(void)
> {
> if (acpi_irq_handler) {
> - acpi_os_remove_interrupt_handler(acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt,
> + acpi_os_remove_interrupt_handler(acpi_irq_number,
> acpi_irq_handler);
> }
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
> index 2652a61..d5c155e 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
> @@ -505,6 +505,8 @@ int __init acpi_irq_penalty_init(void)
> }
> }
> /* Add a penalty for the SCI */
> + if (acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware)
> + return 0;
> acpi_irq_penalty[acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt] += PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING;
> return 0;
> }
Is ARM really going to use the code in pci_link.c? If so, then how exactly?
Rafael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
