On Thu, 21 May 2015, Hanjun Guo wrote: > On 2015年05月21日 04:02, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Mon, 18 May 2015, Hanjun Guo wrote: > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/irq.c b/drivers/acpi/irq.c > > > index 65d6b93..855ead9 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/acpi/irq.c > > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/irq.c > > > @@ -32,6 +32,9 @@ void __init acpi_irqchip_init(void) > > > if (acpi_disabled) > > > return; > > > > > > + if (acpi_gic_version_init()) > > > + return; > > > > This looks just wrong. acpi_irqchip_init() is a generic ACPI function > > and now you stick a GIC specific callback into it? > > For now, acpi_irqchip_init() just introduced for GIC init, not for > APIC init for x86, and I don't see the usage in the near future. > > > > > What calls acpi_irqchip_init? > > I renamed it as acpi_irq_init() in the later patch, which > is called in irqchip_init() in drivers/irqchip/irqchip.c > to init irqchip when DT is not available. Neither of those names is a good choice as they suggest that this is a generic acpi mechanism while in fact it is a GIC specific ACPI extension. And its therefor wrong to put that code into drivers/acpi. It belongs into drivers/irqchip/gic-acpi.c or some other descriptive name. Thanks, tglx
