From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 09:20:49 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 06/20] ARM64 / ACPI: Introduce some PCI functions when PCI is enabled In-Reply-To: <52DCD961.70303@linaro.org> References: <1389961514-13562-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> <201401171504.24525.arnd@arndb.de> <52DCD961.70303@linaro.org> Message-ID: <4387274.ri38HmFxAV@wuerfel> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org 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 ;-) My guess is that whatever code calls this function should be disabled in reduced hw mode. > 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. Arnd