Re: [PATCH V4 1/3] ACPI, PCI, IRQ: assign ISA IRQ directly during early boot stages

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 08:39:30PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 06:21:02PM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> > The penalty determination of ISA IRQ goes through 4 paths.
> > 1. assign PCI_USING during power up via acpi_irq_penalty_init.
> > 2. update the penalty with acpi_penalize_isa_irq function based on the
> > active parameter.
> > 3. kernel command line penalty update via acpi_irq_penalty_update function.
> > 4. increment the penalty as USING right after the IRQ is assign to PCI.
> > 
> > acpi_penalize_isa_irq and acpi_irq_penalty_update functions get called
> > before the ACPI subsystem is started.
> > 
> > These API need to bypass the acpi_irq_get_penalty function.
> 
> I don't mind this patch, but the changelog doesn't tell me what's
> broken and why we need this fix.  Apparently acpi_irq_get_penalty()
> doesn't work before ACPI is initialized, but I don't see *why* it
> wouldn't work.
> 
> However, I see one bug it *does* fix: we do not store the SCI penalty
> in the acpi_isa_irq_penalty[] table because acpi_isa_irq_penalty[]
> only holds ISA IRQ penalties, and there's no guarantee that the SCI is
> an ISA IRQ.  But prior to this patch, we added in the SCI penalty to
> the acpi_isa_irq_penalty[] entry when the SCI was an ISA IRQ, which
> makes acpi_irq_get_penalty() return the wrong thing.  Consider:
> 
>   Initially     acpi_isa_irq_penalty[9] = 0.
>   Assume        sci_interrupt = 9.
>   Then          acpi_irq_get_penalty(9) returns X.
>   If we call    acpi_penalize_isa_irq(9, 1),
>   it sets       acpi_isa_irq_penalty[9] = X,
>   and now       acpi_irq_get_penalty(9) returns X + X.

Oops, I forgot the penalty we *intended* to add with
acpi_penalize_isa_irq().  It's really like this, where X is the SCI
penalty and Y is the part added by acpi_penalize_isa_irq():

  Initially     acpi_isa_irq_penalty[9] = 0.
  Assume        sci_interrupt = 9.
  Then          acpi_irq_get_penalty(9) returns X.
  If we call    acpi_penalize_isa_irq(9, 1),
  it sets       acpi_isa_irq_penalty[9] = X + Y,
  and now       acpi_irq_get_penalty(9) returns X + X + Y.

At the end, acpi_irq_get_penalty(9) *should* return X + Y, but instead
it returns X + X + Y, i.e., the SCI penalty is included twice.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Sparc]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux