On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 01:54:24PM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote: > On 8/30/2016 11:51 AM, Duc Dang wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 3:08 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi > > <lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 06:53:29PM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote: > >>> > >>>>> Let me throw option d here. > >>>>> > >>>>> I know Bjorn wants to keep ACTIVE_LOW in the code for common code but > >>>>> can't we override this in an arch specific way (arm64's pci.c) while > >>>>> creating the root bridge? > >>>> > >>>> On what basis ? You were not copied in from the beginning, but that > >>>> is not different from Duc's initial proposal, which Marc discarded > >>>> because it should not be done at arch level, it depends on the interrupt > >>>> controller. > >>> > >>> I happen to watch the linux-pci and linux-acpi mail-lists. I also saw > >>> Duc's initial proposal. > >>> > >>> I can't imagine someone building an ACPI compliant ARM64 platform > >>> without a GIC interrupt controller. > >>> > >>> The SBSA spec already mentions what kind of compatibility should be > >>> maintained with respect to GIC. You can't have an ACPI system that's > >>> SBSA compliant and not using GIC. > >>> > >>> Can't we just hard code this to ACTIVE_HIGH in arch directory if ACPI > >>> is defined. Why do we have to reach out to the interrupt controller? > >> > >> Patch below (horrible but no solution will be shiny either). > >> > >>> https://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/linaro-acpi/2015-November/005973.html > >> > >> [...] > >> > >>> If you look at my email above, I tried getting rid of PCI Link object > >>> and I couldn't. I sticked to only thing that works. > >> > >> That's what I object to. If the ACPI bindings do not work for ARM > >> we do not work around issues, we upgrade the specs because what may work > >> for you has to work on all ARM platforms (and all FW developers have > >> to be aware of that). Granted, this is a tiny snag, but the point is > >> that no one knows what's the correct way of describing PCI legacy IRQs > >> on ARM and we need that rectified. > >> > >> This does the trick for me (I can turn it into a function/look-up > >> that returns the polarity), I am sure it will ruffle feathers but > >> we have to find a solution so here it is (that acpi_irq_model gem > >> is already used in generic code drivers/acpi/pci_link.c ;-)) > >> > > > > Good catch! This acpi_irq_model gem does help X-Gene :) > > > > +1 to this too. > > We don't need to invent some fake API or push stuff to the arch directory. Ok, I will make it a proper patch and post it then. Thanks, Lorenzo -- 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
