[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <57189880.6030102@suse.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2016 11:08:16 +0200
From: Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
To: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, david.vrabel@...rix.com,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen/x86: actually allocate legacy interrupts on PV guests
On 20/04/16 15:15, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> b4ff8389ed14 is incomplete: relies on nr_legacy_irqs() to get the number
> of legacy interrupts when actually nr_legacy_irqs() returns 0 after
> probe_8259A(). Use NR_IRQS_LEGACY instead.
Would you mind describing the resulting problem? With this commit
message I'm absolutely not capable to decide whether e.g. the other
use of nr_legacy_irqs() in pci_xen_initial_domain() is correct or
not.
Juergen
>
> Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/pci/xen.c b/arch/x86/pci/xen.c
> index beac4df..349b8ce 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/pci/xen.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/pci/xen.c
> @@ -491,8 +491,11 @@ int __init pci_xen_initial_domain(void)
> #endif
> __acpi_register_gsi = acpi_register_gsi_xen;
> __acpi_unregister_gsi = NULL;
> - /* Pre-allocate legacy irqs */
> - for (irq = 0; irq < nr_legacy_irqs(); irq++) {
> + /*
> + * Pre-allocate the legacy IRQs. Use NR_LEGACY_IRQS here
> + * because we don't have a PIC and thus nr_legacy_irqs() is zero.
> + */
> + for (irq = 0; irq < NR_IRQS_LEGACY; irq++) {
> int trigger, polarity;
>
> if (acpi_get_override_irq(irq, &trigger, &polarity) == -1)
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists