[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cf80d0a4-c59d-23ff-081a-cf66feea3563@codeaurora.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 20:01:51 -0700
From: Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, rjw@...ysocki.net, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
ravikanth.nalla@....com, linux@...nbow-software.org,
timur@...eaurora.org, cov@...eaurora.org, jcm@...hat.com,
alex.williamson@...hat.com, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
agross@...eaurora.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, wim@....tudelft.nl,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/3] ACPI, PCI IRQ: add PCI_USING penalty for ISA
interrupts
On 10/20/2016 7:41 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 01:01:04PM -0700, Sinan Kaya wrote:
>> On 10/19/2016 3:44 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>
>>> - Maintain a mapping of (IRQ, penalty). Initially all penalties are
>>> zero. This is for *all* IRQs, not just ISA ones. This could be a
>>> linked list, but the structure is not important as long as we can
>>> add things dynamically.
>>
>> Dynamic allocation doesn't work due to early calls from x86 architecture.
>> This is the reason why we iterate the link objects.
>
> Where exactly is this early penalization? That seems to be the
> biggest problem. Well, maybe the question of ACPI core parsing of
> _CRS/_PRS is a bigger structural problem, but the dynamic allocation
> thing at least seems solvable.
>
http://marc.info/?l=linux-acpi&m=145580159209240&w=2
--
Sinan Kaya
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc.
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists