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 V4 1/3] ACPI, PCI, IRQ: assign ISA IRQ directly during early boot stages
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 09:07:59 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161021140759.GA877@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161021013930.GB31044@localhost>
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 08:39:30PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 06:21:02PM -0400, Sinan Kaya 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.
>
> I don't mind this patch, but the changelog doesn't tell me what's
> broken and why we need this fix. Apparently acpi_irq_get_penalty()
> doesn't work before ACPI is initialized, but I don't see *why* it
> wouldn't work.
>
> However, I see one bug it *does* fix: we do not store the SCI penalty
> in the acpi_isa_irq_penalty[] table because acpi_isa_irq_penalty[]
> only holds ISA IRQ penalties, and there's no guarantee that the SCI is
> an ISA IRQ. But prior to this patch, we added in the SCI penalty to
> the acpi_isa_irq_penalty[] entry when the SCI was an ISA IRQ, which
> makes acpi_irq_get_penalty() return the wrong thing. Consider:
>
> Initially acpi_isa_irq_penalty[9] = 0.
> Assume sci_interrupt = 9.
> Then acpi_irq_get_penalty(9) returns X.
> If we call acpi_penalize_isa_irq(9, 1),
> it sets acpi_isa_irq_penalty[9] = X,
> and now acpi_irq_get_penalty(9) returns X + X.
Oops, I forgot the penalty we *intended* to add with
acpi_penalize_isa_irq(). It's really like this, where X is the SCI
penalty and Y is the part added by acpi_penalize_isa_irq():
Initially acpi_isa_irq_penalty[9] = 0.
Assume sci_interrupt = 9.
Then acpi_irq_get_penalty(9) returns X.
If we call acpi_penalize_isa_irq(9, 1),
it sets acpi_isa_irq_penalty[9] = X + Y,
and now acpi_irq_get_penalty(9) returns X + X + Y.
At the end, acpi_irq_get_penalty(9) *should* return X + Y, but instead
it returns X + X + Y, i.e., the SCI penalty is included twice.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-21 14:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-19 22:21 [PATCH V4 0/3] ACPI, PCI, IRQ: revert penalty calculation for ISA and SCI interrupts Sinan Kaya
2016-10-19 22:21 ` [PATCH V4 1/3] ACPI, PCI, IRQ: assign ISA IRQ directly during early boot stages Sinan Kaya
2016-10-20 21:39 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-10-24 3:48 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-21 1:39 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-10-21 14:07 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2016-10-24 3:22 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-23 3:48 ` [V4, " Jonathan Liu
2016-10-24 4:17 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-24 4:21 ` Jonathan Liu
2016-10-19 22:21 ` [PATCH V4 2/3] Revert "ACPI,PCI,IRQ: remove SCI penalize function" Sinan Kaya
2016-10-21 1:58 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-10-21 14:45 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-10-21 16:13 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-22 14:57 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-10-24 3:48 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-22 23:28 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-10-24 3:48 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-23 3:49 ` [V4,2/3] " Jonathan Liu
2016-10-19 22:21 ` [PATCH V4 3/3] Revert "ACPI, PCI, IRQ: separate ISA penalty calculation" Sinan Kaya
2016-10-21 2:31 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-10-21 2:58 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-22 23:59 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-10-24 4:16 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-23 3:49 ` [V4,3/3] Revert "ACPI,PCI,IRQ: " Jonathan Liu
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=20161021140759.GA877@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).