[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0jm-n8hbS_GFUY4EVKHiRaNPrkNcWDY+6c3SRxWhy4VAg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 23:39:10 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To: Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org>
Cc: ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, ravikanth.nalla@....com,
Ondrej Zary <linux@...nbow-software.org>,
Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>,
Christopher Covington <cov@...eaurora.org>,
Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
Andy Gross <agross@...eaurora.org>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, wim@....tudelft.nl,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/3] ACPI, PCI, IRQ: assign ISA IRQ directly during
early boot stages
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:21 AM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org> 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.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org>
> ---
> drivers/acpi/pci_link.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
> index c983bf7..4f37938 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
> @@ -849,7 +849,7 @@ static int __init acpi_irq_penalty_update(char *str, int used)
> continue;
>
> if (used)
> - new_penalty = acpi_irq_get_penalty(irq) +
> + new_penalty = acpi_isa_irq_penalty[irq] +
> PIRQ_PENALTY_ISA_USED;
> else
> new_penalty = 0;
> @@ -871,7 +871,7 @@ static int __init acpi_irq_penalty_update(char *str, int used)
> void acpi_penalize_isa_irq(int irq, int active)
> {
> if ((irq >= 0) && (irq < ARRAY_SIZE(acpi_isa_irq_penalty)))
> - acpi_isa_irq_penalty[irq] = acpi_irq_get_penalty(irq) +
> + acpi_isa_irq_penalty[irq] = acpi_isa_irq_penalty[irq] +
This looks slightly odd. What about
+ acpi_isa_irq_penalty[irq] +=
> (active ? PIRQ_PENALTY_ISA_USED : PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING);
> }
>
Thanks,
Rafael
Powered by blists - more mailing lists