[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52DD2F23.2010109@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 22:13:55 +0800
From: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC: linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, patches@...aro.org,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Charles.Garcia-Tobin@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/20] ARM64 / ACPI: Introduce some PCI functions when
PCI is enabled
On 2014年01月20日 16:20, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Monday 20 January 2014 16:08:01 Hanjun Guo wrote:
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/plat/arm-core.c b/drivers/acpi/plat/arm-core.c
>>>> index 3c8521d..1835b21 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/plat/arm-core.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/plat/arm-core.c
>>>> @@ -100,6 +100,25 @@ int acpi_gsi_to_irq(u32 gsi, unsigned int *irq)
>>>> }
>>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_gsi_to_irq);
>>>>
>>>> +int acpi_isa_irq_to_gsi(unsigned isa_irq, u32 *gsi)
>>>> +{
>>>> + return -1;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +int acpi_register_ioapic(acpi_handle handle, u64 phys_addr, u32 gsi_base)
>>>> +{
>>>> + /* TBD */
>>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>>> +}
>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(acpi_register_ioapic);
>>>> +
>>>> +int acpi_unregister_ioapic(acpi_handle handle, u32 gsi_base)
>>>> +{
>>>> + /* TBD */
>>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>>> +}
>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(acpi_unregister_ioapic);
>>>> +
>>> My feeling is that these are better handled in the ACPI code by not
>>> calling them on architectures that have no ISA or no IOAPIC support.
>>>
>>> We have configuration symbols for both, so you don't have to make
>>> it depend on CONFIG_ARM64 or CONFIG_X86.
>> Do you mean introduce a stub function when there is no ISA support?
> Do you anticipate ISA devices on ARM64? I hope not ;-)
me too :)
>
> My guess is that whatever code calls this function should be disabled
> in reduced hw mode.
ok, that would be make sense, will update it in next version.
>
>> acpi_register_ioapic()/acpi_unregister_ioapic() will be used for IOAPIC
>> hotplug and GIC distributor is something like IOAPIC on x86, so I think
>> these two functions can be reserved for future use.
> But GIC is not hotplugged, is it? It still sounds x86 specific to me.
Well, if we want to do physical CPU hotplug on ARM/ARM64 (maybe years
later?),
then GIC add/remove is needed because we have to remove GIC
on the SoC too when we remove the physical CPU.
Thanks
Hanjun
--
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