On 11/11/2016 09:46 PM, Hanjun Guo wrote:
Hi Mark,
Sorry for the late reply.
On 10/21/2016 12:37 AM, Mark Rutland wrote:
Hi,
As a heads-up, on v4.9-rc1 I see conflicts at least against
arch/arm64/Kconfig. Luckily git am -3 seems to be able to fix that up
automatically, but this will need to be rebased before the next posting
and/or merging.
On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 02:17:12AM +0800, fu.wei@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
+static int __init map_gt_gsi(u32 interrupt, u32 flags)
+{
+ int trigger, polarity;
+
+ if (!interrupt)
+ return 0;
Urgh.
Only the secure interrupt (which we do not need) is optional in this
manner, and (hilariously), zero appears to also be a valid GSIV, per
figure 5-24 in the ACPI 6.1 spec.
So, I think that:
(a) we should not bother parsing the secure interrupt
(b) we should drop the check above
(c) we should report the spec issue to the ASWG
Sorry, I willing to do that, but I need to figure out the issue here.
What kind of issue in detail? do you mean that zero should not be valid
for arch timer interrupts?
OK, I think you are referring to "we don't need the secure interrupt",
correct me if I'm wrong (still in jet lag...).
Thanks
Hanjun
--
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
