From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>
Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net,
bhelgaas@google.com, ravikanth.nalla@hpe.com,
linux@rainbow-software.org, timur@codeaurora.org,
cov@codeaurora.org, jcm@redhat.com, alex.williamson@redhat.com,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, agross@codeaurora.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
wim@djo.tudelft.nl, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/3] ACPI, PCI IRQ: add PCI_USING penalty for ISA interrupts
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 21:41:11 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161021024111.GA24336@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a418cf9d-5eeb-a588-6653-fd00e0c2693c@codeaurora.org>
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.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-21 2:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-15 4:31 [PATCH V3 0/3] ACPI, PCI, IRQ: revert penalty calculation for ISA and SCI interrupts Sinan Kaya
2016-10-15 4:31 ` [PATCH V3 1/3] ACPI, PCI IRQ: add PCI_USING penalty for ISA interrupts Sinan Kaya
2016-10-15 12:39 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-10-15 16:58 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-18 13:59 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-10-18 15:20 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-18 15:32 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-19 22:44 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-10-19 23:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-10-21 0:59 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-10-20 20:01 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-20 21:08 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-10-20 21:25 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-21 2:41 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2016-10-21 3:01 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-19 22:24 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-22 23:58 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-10-24 4:16 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-15 4:31 ` [PATCH V3 2/3] Revert "ACPI,PCI,IRQ: remove SCI penalize function" Sinan Kaya
2016-10-15 13:06 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-10-18 14:05 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-10-18 15:05 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-15 4:31 ` [PATCH V3 3/3] ACPI,PCI,IRQ: correct SCI penalty calculation Sinan Kaya
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20161021024111.GA24336@localhost \
--to=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=agross@codeaurora.org \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=cov@codeaurora.org \
--cc=jcm@redhat.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@rainbow-software.org \
--cc=okaya@codeaurora.org \
--cc=ravikanth.nalla@hpe.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=timur@codeaurora.org \
--cc=wim@djo.tudelft.nl \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).