[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m17hk8oy5g.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2010 02:15:07 -0700
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: oops in ioapic_write_entry
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> writes:
> On 08/03/2010 01:56 AM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> writes:
>>
>>> On 08/03/2010 01:00 AM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>>> Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org> writes:
>>>>
>>>>>>> Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c
>>>>>>> ===================================================================
>>>>>>> --- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c
>>>>>>> +++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c
>>>>>>> @@ -1029,10 +1029,7 @@ static int pin_2_irq(int idx, int apic,
>>>>>>> } else {
>>>>>>> u32 gsi = mp_gsi_routing[apic].gsi_base + pin;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - if (gsi >= NR_IRQS_LEGACY)
>>>>>>> - irq = gsi;
>>>>>>> - else
>>>>>>> - irq = gsi_top + gsi;
>>>>>>> + irq = gsi_to_irq(gsi);
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
>>>>>
>>>>> what is the point for making irq = gsi_top + gsi when mptable is used instead of acpi?
>>>>
>>>> Because it is only convention that when mptables are used that the
>>>> first apic pins 0-15 are the ISA irqs. This thread witnessed and a
>>>> pci irq that came in pin < 16 that was not an ISA irq. The truly rare
>>>> and exotic case would be for the ISA irqs to be outside the first 16
>>>> ioapic pins but the es7000 did exactly that.
>>>
>>> nvidia chipset if acpi is enabled, external pci device will use ioapic from 16 to 23.
>>>
>>> if mptable is used, external pci device will not use pin from 16 to 23..., and lot of devices will share same pin.
>>
>> Exactly. Pins < 16 are not necessarily ISA irqs, and can be possibly
>> shared level triggered PCI irqs. Unfortunately there are strange
>> boards like the es7000 where pins > 16 are ISA irqs.
>>
>> The other thing that is gained by having pin_2_irq always remap pins <
>> 16 is we can get away with the numerous hard codes in the arch/x86 and elsewhere
>> that assume irq < 16 is an ISA irq.
>
> how about this one ?
You can't share an edge triggered ISA irq, it isn't really physically
possible. So I don't see how this extra complexity will change anything.
Eric
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c
> +++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/kernel/apic/io_apic.c
> @@ -1013,6 +1013,28 @@ static inline int irq_trigger(int idx)
> return MPBIOS_trigger(idx);
> }
>
> +static int shared_with_legacy(int apic, int pin)
> +{
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < mp_irq_entries; i++) {
> + int bus = mp_irqs[i].srcbus;
> +
> + if (!test_bit(bus, mp_bus_not_pci))
> + continue;
> +
> + if (mp_ioapics[apic].apicid != mp_irqs[i].dstapic)
> + continue;
> +
> + if (mp_irqs[i].dstirq != pin)
> + continue;
> +
> + return mp_irqs[i].srcbusirq;
> + }
> +
> + return -1;
> +}
> +
> static int pin_2_irq(int idx, int apic, int pin)
> {
> int irq;
> @@ -1029,10 +1051,13 @@ static int pin_2_irq(int idx, int apic,
> } else {
> u32 gsi = mp_gsi_routing[apic].gsi_base + pin;
>
> - if (gsi >= NR_IRQS_LEGACY)
> + if (gsi >= NR_IRQS_LEGACY) {
> irq = gsi;
> - else
> - irq = gsi_top + gsi;
> + } else {
> + irq = shared_with_legacy(apic, pin);
> + if (irq < 0)
> + irq = gsi_top + gsi;
> + }
> }
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists