Hi, > From: Rafael J. Wysocki [mailto:rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ACPICA: Events: Introduce > acpi_block_gpe()/acpi_unblock_gpe()/acpi_control_gpe_handling() to > allow administrative GPE enabling/disabling > > On Monday, May 16, 2016 05:11:11 PM Lv Zheng wrote: > > There is a facility in Linux, developers can manage GPE enabling/disabling > > through /sys/firmware/acpi/interrupts/gpexx. This is mainly for > debugging > > purposes. Many users expect to use this facility to implement quirks to > > disable specific GPEs when there is a gap in Linux causing GPE flood. > > This is not working correctly because currently this facility invokes > > enabling/disabling counting based GPE driver APIs: > > acpi_enable_gpe()/acpi_disable_gpe() > > and the GPE drivers can still affect the count to mess up the GPE > > management purposes. > > > > This patch introduces acpi_block_gpe()/acpi_unblock_gpe() to be used in > such > > situation instead of acpi_enable_gpe()/acpi_disable_gpe(). > > Up to this point, I agree. > > > The idea to implement this is to replace the GPE register EN bit with the > > managed value, block EN set/clear operations but record the operation > > results in blocked_enabled, so that after the managed state is removed, > > restore the saved blocked_enabled back to the GPE register EN bit. > > Unfortunately, I don't really follow the above paragraph, so chances are > that > whoever is not familiar with the code will not be able to follow it either. [Lv Zheng] I see. I should stop talking this using "managed". It is better to use "masked". As this facility is actually trying to implement the kind of the facility that can be seen in many other IRQ chips - the IRQ MASK bit. > > > Now OSPMs should be able to use this facility to generate quirks. ACPICA > > BZ 1102. > > > > This facility can also be used by the administrator to control the GPE > > handling mode during the runtime when the driver is capable of handling > the > > GPE in both the interrupt mode and the polling mode (for example, the > Linux > > EC driver). acpi_control_gpe_handling() is offered for this purpose. Lv > Zheng. > > That is too much. The patch should focus on the block/unblock > functionality. > Anything beyond that should be added later IMO. [Lv Zheng] OK. So after examining all of your comments. I think what I need to improve is eliminating this feature. That should be able to make the code simpler and thus easier for the others to follow. > > > Link: https://bugs.acpica.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1102 > > Signed-off-by: Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/acpi/acpica/acevents.h | 3 + > > drivers/acpi/acpica/aclocal.h | 1 + > > drivers/acpi/acpica/evgpe.c | 84 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > drivers/acpi/acpica/evxfgpe.c | 142 > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > drivers/acpi/acpica/hwgpe.c | 24 ++++++- > > include/acpi/acpixf.h | 23 +++++-- > > include/acpi/actypes.h | 85 +++++++++++++++++++----- > > 7 files changed, 336 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpica/acevents.h > b/drivers/acpi/acpica/acevents.h > > index 77af91c..3a6e4db 100644 > > --- a/drivers/acpi/acpica/acevents.h > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpica/acevents.h > > @@ -86,6 +86,9 @@ acpi_ev_update_gpe_enable_mask(struct > acpi_gpe_event_info *gpe_event_info); > > acpi_status acpi_ev_enable_gpe(struct acpi_gpe_event_info > *gpe_event_info); > > > > acpi_status > > +acpi_ev_manage_gpe(struct acpi_gpe_event_info *gpe_event_info, u8 > action); > > + > > +acpi_status > > acpi_ev_add_gpe_reference(struct acpi_gpe_event_info > *gpe_event_info); > > > > acpi_status > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpica/aclocal.h b/drivers/acpi/acpica/aclocal.h > > index 13331d7..17a6834 100644 > > --- a/drivers/acpi/acpica/aclocal.h > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpica/aclocal.h > > @@ -484,6 +484,7 @@ struct acpi_gpe_event_info { > > u8 flags; /* Misc info about this GPE */ > > u8 gpe_number; /* This GPE */ > > u8 runtime_count; /* References to a run GPE */ > > + u8 blocked_enabled; /* GPE should be enabled but blocked */ > > I'm not sure I'm following the logic here. > > What's needed is disabled and blocked. Why do we need enabled and > blocked? [Lv Zheng] I just used this variable to track the "expected GPE hardware register's EN bit value" from driver's point of view. So: 1. If it is TRUE, it means GPE register's EN bit should be flagged from the drivers' point of view. 2. If it is FALSE, it means GPE register's EN bit should be unflagged from the drivers' point view. When acpi_unblock_gpe() is invoked, I need the value here to be restored to the "GPE hardware register's EN bit". So it looks like the driver expected "EN bit value" was blocked by this facility. That's why I use the name of "blocked_enabled". Is it acceptable now with the justification? > > > }; > > > > /* Information about a GPE register pair, one per each status/enable > pair in an array */ > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpica/evgpe.c b/drivers/acpi/acpica/evgpe.c > > index 4b4949c..f821bdd 100644 > > --- a/drivers/acpi/acpica/evgpe.c > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpica/evgpe.c > > @@ -130,6 +130,90 @@ acpi_status acpi_ev_enable_gpe(struct > acpi_gpe_event_info *gpe_event_info) > > > > > /********************************************************* > ********************** > > * > > + * FUNCTION: acpi_ev_manage_gpe > > + * > > + * PARAMETERS: gpe_event_info - GPE to force enabling/disabling > > + * action - ACPI_GPE_ENABLE, ACPI_GPE_DISABLE or > > + * ACPI_GPE_UNMANAGE > > + * > > + * RETURN: Status > > + * > > + * DESCRIPTION: Unconditionally enable or disable an individual GPE for > the > > + * administrative purposes during the runtime. > > + * > > + > ********************************************************** > ********************/ > > + > > +acpi_status > > +acpi_ev_manage_gpe(struct acpi_gpe_event_info *gpe_event_info, u8 > action) > > +{ > > + acpi_status status; > > + acpi_event_status event_status; > > + > > + ACPI_FUNCTION_TRACE(ev_manage_gpe); > > + > > + /* Perform the action */ > > + > > + switch (action) { > > + case ACPI_GPE_ENABLE: > > + case ACPI_GPE_DISABLE: > > + > > + if (!(gpe_event_info->flags & > ACPI_GPE_MANAGED_FLAG_MASK)) { > > + status = > > + acpi_hw_get_gpe_status(gpe_event_info, > > + &event_status); > > + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) { > > + return_ACPI_STATUS(status); > > + } > > + if (event_status & ACPI_EVENT_FLAG_ENABLE_SET) > { > > + gpe_event_info->blocked_enabled = TRUE; > > + } else { > > + gpe_event_info->blocked_enabled = FALSE; > > + } > > + } > > + > > + /* Reset flags so that acpi_hw_low_set_gpe() can take > effective */ > > + > > + gpe_event_info->flags &= > ~ACPI_GPE_MANAGED_FLAG_MASK; > > + if (action == ACPI_GPE_ENABLE) { > > + (void)acpi_hw_low_set_gpe(gpe_event_info, > > + ACPI_GPE_ENABLE); > > + gpe_event_info->flags |= > ACPI_GPE_MANAGED_ENABLED; > > + } else { > > + (void)acpi_hw_low_set_gpe(gpe_event_info, > > + ACPI_GPE_DISABLE); > > + gpe_event_info->flags |= > ACPI_GPE_MANAGED_DISABLED; > > + } > > + break; > > + > > + case ACPI_GPE_UNMANAGE: > > + > > + if (!(gpe_event_info->flags & > ACPI_GPE_MANAGED_FLAG_MASK)) { > > + return_ACPI_STATUS(AE_BAD_PARAMETER); > > + } > > + > > + /* Reset flags so that acpi_hw_low_set_gpe() can take > effective */ > > + > > + gpe_event_info->flags &= > ~ACPI_GPE_MANAGED_FLAG_MASK; > > + if (gpe_event_info->blocked_enabled) { > > + (void)acpi_hw_low_set_gpe(gpe_event_info, > > + ACPI_GPE_ENABLE); > > + } else { > > + (void)acpi_hw_low_set_gpe(gpe_event_info, > > + ACPI_GPE_DISABLE); > > + } > > + gpe_event_info->blocked_enabled = FALSE; > > + break; > > + > > The code above is really hard to follow. > > Maybe the description in the comment above the function should be more, > well, > descriptive? [Lv Zheng] OK, I'll improve it. Also with acpi_control_gpe_handling() deleted, code here should be much simpler. > > > + default: > > + > > + return_ACPI_STATUS(AE_BAD_PARAMETER); > > + } > > + > > + return_ACPI_STATUS(AE_OK); > > +} > > + > > > +/******************************************************** > *********************** > > + * > > * FUNCTION: acpi_ev_add_gpe_reference > > * > > * PARAMETERS: gpe_event_info - Add a reference to this GPE > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpica/evxfgpe.c b/drivers/acpi/acpica/evxfgpe.c > > index 17cfef7..3ad8fa9 100644 > > --- a/drivers/acpi/acpica/evxfgpe.c > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpica/evxfgpe.c > > @@ -257,6 +257,148 @@ ACPI_EXPORT_SYMBOL(acpi_set_gpe) > > > > > /********************************************************* > ********************** > > * > > + * FUNCTION: acpi_block_gpe > > + * > > + * PARAMETERS: gpe_device - Parent GPE Device. NULL for > GPE0/GPE1 > > + * gpe_number - GPE level within the GPE block > > + * > > + * RETURN: Status > > + * > > + * DESCRIPTION: Unconditionally disable an individual GPE. > > + * This API is typically used by the system administrator to > > + * block the GPE enabling, ex., prevent the GPE flooding. > > + * > > + > ********************************************************** > ********************/ > > +acpi_status acpi_block_gpe(acpi_handle gpe_device, u32 gpe_number) > > +{ > > + struct acpi_gpe_event_info *gpe_event_info; > > + acpi_status status; > > + acpi_cpu_flags flags; > > + > > + ACPI_FUNCTION_TRACE(acpi_block_gpe); > > + > > + flags = acpi_os_acquire_lock(acpi_gbl_gpe_lock); > > + > > + /* Ensure that we have a valid GPE number */ > > + > > + gpe_event_info = acpi_ev_get_gpe_event_info(gpe_device, > gpe_number); > > + if (!gpe_event_info) { > > + status = AE_BAD_PARAMETER; > > + goto unlock_and_exit; > > + } > > + > > + status = acpi_ev_manage_gpe(gpe_event_info, > ACPI_GPE_DISABLE); > > So I would prefer the second argument here to be something like > ACPI_GPE_DISABLE | ACPI_GPE_BLOCK as then the code would be quite > straightforward to understand. [Lv Zheng] OK. > > > + > > +unlock_and_exit: > > + acpi_os_release_lock(acpi_gbl_gpe_lock, flags); > > + return_ACPI_STATUS(status); > > +} > > + > > +ACPI_EXPORT_SYMBOL(acpi_block_gpe) > > + > > > +/******************************************************** > *********************** > > + * > > + * FUNCTION: acpi_unblock_gpe > > + * > > + * PARAMETERS: gpe_device - Parent GPE Device. NULL for > GPE0/GPE1 > > + * gpe_number - GPE level within the GPE block > > + * > > + * RETURN: Status > > + * > > + * DESCRIPTION: Stop unconditional GPE disabling. > > + * This API reverts acpi_block_gpe(). > > + * > > + > ********************************************************** > ********************/ > > +acpi_status acpi_unblock_gpe(acpi_handle gpe_device, u32 > gpe_number) > > +{ > > + struct acpi_gpe_event_info *gpe_event_info; > > + acpi_status status; > > + acpi_cpu_flags flags; > > + > > + ACPI_FUNCTION_TRACE(acpi_unblock_gpe); > > + > > + flags = acpi_os_acquire_lock(acpi_gbl_gpe_lock); > > + > > + /* Ensure that we have a valid GPE number */ > > + > > + gpe_event_info = acpi_ev_get_gpe_event_info(gpe_device, > gpe_number); > > + if (!gpe_event_info) { > > + status = AE_BAD_PARAMETER; > > + goto unlock_and_exit; > > + } > > + > > + status = acpi_ev_manage_gpe(gpe_event_info, > ACPI_GPE_UNMANAGE); > > And that is completely unclear to me. [Lv Zheng] The original code implemented 3 states. Blocked (GPE register's EN bit is not changeable) but disabled (and it is always 0). Blocked (GPE register's EN bit is not changeable) but enabled (and it is always 1). Unblocked (GPE register's EN bit is changeable). So the wording "MANAGE" is really a bad idea, causing all kind of misunderstandings. :) > > > + > > +unlock_and_exit: > > + acpi_os_release_lock(acpi_gbl_gpe_lock, flags); > > + return_ACPI_STATUS(status); > > +} > > + > > +ACPI_EXPORT_SYMBOL(acpi_unblock_gpe) > > + > > > +/******************************************************** > *********************** > > + * > > + * FUNCTION: acpi_control_gpe_handling > > + * > > + * PARAMETERS: gpe_device - Parent GPE Device. NULL for > GPE0/GPE1 > > + * gpe_number - GPE level within the GPE block > > + * use_interrupt_mode - Allow the GPE to be dispatched in the > > + * interrupt mode > > + * use_polling_mode - Allow the GPE to be dispatched in the > > + * polling mode > > + * > > + * RETURN: Status > > + * > > + * DESCRIPTION: Switch the GPE handling mode between the interrupt > only mode, > > + * the polling only mode and the interrupt/polling adaptive > mode. > > + * > > + > ********************************************************** > ********************/ > > This is extra functionality that you want to piggy back on a fix for a real > issue. > > Please separate it from that fix, it doesn't belong here. [Lv Zheng] OK. > > > +acpi_status > > +acpi_control_gpe_handling(acpi_handle gpe_device, > > + u32 gpe_number, > > + u8 use_interrupt_mode, u8 use_polling_mode) > > +{ > > + struct acpi_gpe_event_info *gpe_event_info; > > + acpi_status status; > > + acpi_cpu_flags flags; > > + u8 action; > > + > > + ACPI_FUNCTION_TRACE(acpi_control_gpe_handling); > > + > > + if (!use_interrupt_mode && !use_polling_mode) { > > + return_ACPI_STATUS(AE_BAD_PARAMETER); > > + } > > + > > + flags = acpi_os_acquire_lock(acpi_gbl_gpe_lock); > > + > > + /* Ensure that we have a valid GPE number */ > > + > > + gpe_event_info = acpi_ev_get_gpe_event_info(gpe_device, > gpe_number); > > + if (!gpe_event_info) { > > + status = AE_BAD_PARAMETER; > > + goto unlock_and_exit; > > + } > > + > > + /* Pick up and peform the correct action */ > > + > > + action = ACPI_GPE_UNMANAGE; > > + if (!use_interrupt_mode) { > > + action = ACPI_GPE_DISABLE; > > + } > > + if (!use_polling_mode) { > > + action = ACPI_GPE_ENABLE; > > + } > > + status = acpi_ev_manage_gpe(gpe_event_info, action); > > + > > +unlock_and_exit: > > + acpi_os_release_lock(acpi_gbl_gpe_lock, flags); > > + return_ACPI_STATUS(status); > > +} > > + > > +ACPI_EXPORT_SYMBOL(acpi_control_gpe_handling) > > + > > > +/******************************************************** > *********************** > > + * > > * FUNCTION: acpi_mark_gpe_for_wake > > * > > * PARAMETERS: gpe_device - Parent GPE Device. NULL for > GPE0/GPE1 > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwgpe.c b/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwgpe.c > > index bdecd5e..8cdddbe 100644 > > --- a/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwgpe.c > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpica/hwgpe.c > > @@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ acpi_status > > acpi_hw_low_set_gpe(struct acpi_gpe_event_info *gpe_event_info, > u32 action) > > { > > struct acpi_gpe_register_info *gpe_register_info; > > - acpi_status status; > > + acpi_status status = AE_OK; > > u32 enable_mask; > > u32 register_bit; > > > > @@ -148,9 +148,21 @@ acpi_hw_low_set_gpe(struct > acpi_gpe_event_info *gpe_event_info, u32 action) > > return (AE_BAD_PARAMETER); > > } > > > > - /* Write the updated enable mask */ > > + /* Check if there is an administrative GPE enabling/disabling */ > > > > - status = acpi_hw_write(enable_mask, &gpe_register_info- > >enable_address); > > + if (gpe_event_info->flags & ACPI_GPE_MANAGED_FLAG_MASK) { > > + if (enable_mask & register_bit) { > > + gpe_event_info->blocked_enabled = TRUE; > > + } else { > > + gpe_event_info->blocked_enabled = FALSE; > > + } > > + } else { > > + /* Write the updated enable mask */ > > + > > + status = > > + acpi_hw_write(enable_mask, > > + &gpe_register_info->enable_address); > > + } > > return (status); > > } > > > > @@ -228,6 +240,12 @@ acpi_hw_get_gpe_status(struct > acpi_gpe_event_info *gpe_event_info, > > local_event_status |= ACPI_EVENT_FLAG_HAS_HANDLER; > > } > > > > + /* GPE currently managed? (enabled/disabled by the system > admin?) */ > > + > > + if (gpe_event_info->flags & ACPI_GPE_MANAGED_FLAG_MASK) { > > + local_event_status |= ACPI_EVENT_FLAG_MANAGED; > > + } > > + > > /* Get the info block for the entire GPE register */ > > > > gpe_register_info = gpe_event_info->register_info; > > diff --git a/include/acpi/acpixf.h b/include/acpi/acpixf.h > > index 4e4c214..a0a6544 100644 > > --- a/include/acpi/acpixf.h > > +++ b/include/acpi/acpixf.h > > @@ -732,15 +732,28 @@ > ACPI_HW_DEPENDENT_RETURN_STATUS(acpi_status > > u32 gpe_number)) > > > > ACPI_HW_DEPENDENT_RETURN_STATUS(acpi_status > > - acpi_mark_gpe_for_wake(acpi_handle > gpe_device, > > - u32 gpe_number)) > > + acpi_block_gpe(acpi_handle gpe_device, > > + u32 gpe_number)) > > + > > +ACPI_HW_DEPENDENT_RETURN_STATUS(acpi_status > > + acpi_unblock_gpe(acpi_handle gpe_device, > > + u32 gpe_number)) > > > > ACPI_HW_DEPENDENT_RETURN_STATUS(acpi_status > > - acpi_setup_gpe_for_wake(acpi_handle > > - parent_device, > > - acpi_handle > gpe_device, > > + acpi_control_gpe_handling(acpi_handle > > + gpe_device, > > + u32 gpe_number, > > + u8 > use_interrupt_mode, > > + u8 > use_polling_mode)) > > +ACPI_HW_DEPENDENT_RETURN_STATUS(acpi_status > > + acpi_mark_gpe_for_wake(acpi_handle > gpe_device, > > u32 gpe_number)) > > ACPI_HW_DEPENDENT_RETURN_STATUS(acpi_status > > + acpi_setup_gpe_for_wake(acpi_handle > > + parent_device, > > + acpi_handle > gpe_device, > > + u32 gpe_number)) > > +ACPI_HW_DEPENDENT_RETURN_STATUS(acpi_status > > acpi_set_gpe_wake_mask(acpi_handle > gpe_device, > > u32 gpe_number, > > u8 action)) > > diff --git a/include/acpi/actypes.h b/include/acpi/actypes.h > > index cb389ef..9f841f2 100644 > > --- a/include/acpi/actypes.h > > +++ b/include/acpi/actypes.h > > @@ -732,16 +732,17 @@ typedef u32 acpi_event_type; > > * The encoding of acpi_event_status is illustrated below. > > * Note that a set bit (1) indicates the property is TRUE > > * (e.g. if bit 0 is set then the event is enabled). > > - * +-------------+-+-+-+-+-+ > > - * | Bits 31:5 |4|3|2|1|0| > > - * +-------------+-+-+-+-+-+ > > - * | | | | | | > > - * | | | | | +- Enabled? > > - * | | | | +--- Enabled for wake? > > - * | | | +----- Status bit set? > > - * | | +------- Enable bit set? > > - * | +--------- Has a handler? > > - * +--------------- <Reserved> > > + * +-------------+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > > + * | Bits 31:6 |5|4|3|2|1|0| > > + * +-------------+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > > + * | | | | | | | > > + * | | | | | | +- Enabled? > > + * | | | | | +--- Enabled for wake? > > + * | | | | +----- Status bit set? > > + * | | | +------- Enable bit set? > > + * | | +--------- Has a handler? > > + * | +----------- Enabling/disabling forced? > > + * +----------------- <Reserved> > > */ > > typedef u32 acpi_event_status; > > > > @@ -751,6 +752,7 @@ typedef u32 acpi_event_status; > > #define ACPI_EVENT_FLAG_STATUS_SET (acpi_event_status) 0x04 > > #define ACPI_EVENT_FLAG_ENABLE_SET (acpi_event_status) 0x08 > > #define ACPI_EVENT_FLAG_HAS_HANDLER (acpi_event_status) 0x10 > > +#define ACPI_EVENT_FLAG_MANAGED (acpi_event_status) 0x20 > > The meaning of this new flag is unclear. It probably should be something > like > ACPI_EVENT_FLAG_BLOCKED or MASKED meaning that if set, the GPE > cannot be > disabled or enabled by usual means (until that flag is cleared). [Lv Zheng] OK. > > > #define ACPI_EVENT_FLAG_SET ACPI_EVENT_FLAG_STATUS_SET > > > > /* Actions for acpi_set_gpe, acpi_gpe_wakeup, acpi_hw_low_set_gpe > */ > > @@ -758,17 +760,20 @@ typedef u32 acpi_event_status; > > #define ACPI_GPE_ENABLE 0 > > #define ACPI_GPE_DISABLE 1 > > #define ACPI_GPE_CONDITIONAL_ENABLE 2 > > +#define ACPI_GPE_UNMANAGE 3 > > > > /* > > * GPE info flags - Per GPE > > - * +-------+-+-+---+ > > - * | 7:5 |4|3|2:0| > > - * +-------+-+-+---+ > > - * | | | | > > - * | | | +-- Type of dispatch:to method, handler, notify, or none > > - * | | +----- Interrupt type: edge or level triggered > > - * | +------- Is a Wake GPE > > - * +------------ <Reserved> > > + * +-+-+-+-+-+---+ > > + * |7|6|5|4|3|2:0| > > + * +-+-+-+-+-+---+ > > + * | | | | | | > > + * | | | | | +-- Type of dispatch:to method, handler, notify, or none > > + * | | | | +----- Interrupt type: edge or level triggered > > + * | | | +------- Is a Wake GPE > > + * | | +--------- Force GPE enabling > > + * | +----------- Force GPE disabling > > + * +------------- <Reserved> > > */ > > #define ACPI_GPE_DISPATCH_NONE (u8) 0x00 > > #define ACPI_GPE_DISPATCH_METHOD (u8) 0x01 > > @@ -785,6 +790,50 @@ typedef u32 acpi_event_status; > > #define ACPI_GPE_CAN_WAKE (u8) 0x10 > > > > /* > > + * Flags used by the GPE management APIs > > + * > > + * The GPE management APIs are not implemented for the GPE drivers. > It is > > + * designed for providing the management purposes out of the GPE > drivers' > > + * awareness. The GPE driver APIs should still be working as expected > > + * during the period the GPE management purposes are applied. There > are 2 > > + * use cases for the flags: > > + * > > + * 1. Prevent the GPE flooding > > + * These flags can be used to control how the GPE is dispatched by the > > + * event dispatcher. Note that the ACPI_GPE_MANAGED_DISABLED > can also be > > + * used to prevent the GPE flooding that cannot be prevented due to > the > > + * ACPI_GPE_DISPATCH_NONE sanity check. This kind of the GPE > flooding > > + * happens on the GPE where there is a _Lxx/_Exx prepared by the > BIOS > > + * but the OSPM still cannot handle it correctly by executing the > > + * method. Such kind of incapability is mostly because of the feature > > + * gaps in the OSPM: > > + * ACPI_GPE_MANAGED_ENABLED: force the event dispatcher to > always > > + * enable the GPE > > + * ACPI_GPE_MANAGED_DISABLED: force the event dispatcher to > always > > + * disable the GPE > > + * prevent the GPE from flooding > > + * acpi_block_gpe()/acpi_unblock_gpe() are the APIs offering the GPE > > + * flooding prevention feature. > > + * > > + * 2. Control the GPE handling mode > > + * A GPE driver may be able to handle the GPE both in the interrupt > mode > > + * and in the polling mode. Since the polling mode is a mechanism > > + * implemented by the driver itself and is not controlled by the event > > + * dispatcher, this mechanism can be used to switch between the > > + * interrupt mode (dispatched via the event dispatcher) and the > polling > > + * mode (implemented by the GPE drivers): > > + * ACPI_GPE_MANAGED_ENABLED: force the driver to use the > interrupt mode > > + * ACPI_GPE_MANAGED_DISABLED: force the driver to use the polling > mode > > + * None: allow the driver to use the > > + * interrupt/polling adaptive mode > > + * acpi_control_gpe_handling() is the API offering the GPE handling > mode > > + * switch feature. > > + */ > > +#define ACPI_GPE_MANAGED_ENABLED (u8) 0x20 > > +#define ACPI_GPE_MANAGED_DISABLED (u8) 0x40 > > +#define ACPI_GPE_MANAGED_FLAG_MASK (u8) 0x60 > > + > > +/* > > * Flags for GPE and Lock interfaces > > */ > > #define ACPI_NOT_ISR 0x1 > > Thanks, > Rafael [Lv Zheng] Thanks for the review. Best regards -Lv ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{�����ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
