On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 6:37 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> On Tuesday, February 12, 2013 11:11:23 AM Yinghai Lu wrote: >>>>>> Peter Hurley found "irq 18 nobody cared" with pci-next, and dmesg has >>>>>> >>>>>> [ 8.983246] pci 0000:00:1e.0: can't derive routing for PCI INT A >>>>>> [ 8.983600] snd_ctxfi 0000:09:02.0: PCI INT A: no GSI - using ISA IRQ 5 >>>>>> >>>>>> bisect to >>>>>> | commit 4f535093cf8f6da8cfda7c36c2c1ecd2e9586ee4 >>>>>> | PCI: Put pci_dev in device tree as early as possible >>>>>> >>>>>> It turns out we need to call acpi_pci_irq_add_prt() after the pci bridges >>>>>> are scanned. >>>>>> >>>>>> Bjorn said: >>>>>> The bus number binding means acpi_pci_irq_add_prt() has to happen >>>>>> after enumerating everything below a bridge, and it will prevent us >>>>>> from doing any bus number reassignment for hotplug. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think we should remove the bus numbers from the cached _PRT (or >>>>>> maybe even remove the _PRT caching completely). When we enable a PCI >>>>>> device's IRQ, we should search up the PCI device tree looking for a >>>>>> _PRT associated with each node, and applying normal PCI bridge >>>>>> swizzling when we don't find a _PRT. I think this can be done without >>>>>> using PCI bus numbers at all. >>>>>> >>>>>> So here we try to remove _PRT caching completely. >>>>>> >>>>>> -v2: check !handle early. >>>>>> >>>>>> Reported-and-tested-by: Peter Hurley <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> Suggested-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> >>>>> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> >>>>> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c | 95 +++++++++++++++++--------------------------- >>>>>> drivers/acpi/pci_root.c | 18 -------- >>>>>> drivers/pci/pci-acpi.c | 24 ----------- >>>>>> include/acpi/acpi_drivers.h | 5 -- >>>>>> 4 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 104 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> Bjorn, >>>> >>>> Can you put this one into pci/next? >>> >>> I'm not sure what this patch is based on or what the best way to merge >>> it is. It doesn't apply cleanly to my next or >>> pci/yinghai-root-bus-hotplug branches. >> >> My fault, that is based on pci/next + pm/linux-next >> >> linux-next removed >> acpi_power_resource_(un)register_device ... >> >>> >>> I did apply it manually on top of pci/yinghai-root-bus-hotplug to try >>> it out, but we need to tweak the messages a little bit. >>> >>> Previously we printed "ACPI: PCI Interrupt Routing Table [%s._PRT]" >>> once when loading it, which was fine. Now we print it every time we >>> look at a _PRT, which is too much because it isn't really adding any >>> information. >>> >>> We also print "ACPI Exception: AE_NOT_FOUND, Evaluating _PRT >>> [AE_NOT_FOUND] (20121018/pci_irq-259)" if we find ACPI nodes without >>> _PRTs, which we shouldn't do, because that's a common and normal >>> situation. >> >> Sure. Can you have separated patch to do that ? >> >> Or want me to resend the patch. > > Please check attached updated version that remove print out ... > > and it could be applied cleanly on top of pci/yinghai-root-bus-hotplug Thanks, I applied this to pci/yinghai-root-bus-hotplug and merged it into my next branch. Bjorn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
