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: Sat, 22 Oct 2016 18:58:37 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161022235837.GA1668@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1476505867-24599-2-git-send-email-okaya@codeaurora.org>
On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 12:31:05AM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> The change introduced in commit 103544d86976 ("ACPI,PCI,IRQ: reduce
> resource requirements") removed PCI_USING penalty from
> acpi_pci_link_allocate function as there is no longer a fixed size penalty
> array for both PCI interrupts greater than 16.
>
> The array size has been reduced to 16 and array name got prefixed as ISA
> since it only is accountable for the ISA interrupts.
>
> The original change in commit 103544d86976 ("ACPI,PCI,IRQ: reduce
> resource requirements") removed penalty assignment in the code for PCI
> thinking that we will add the penalty later in acpi_irq_pci_sharing_penalty
> function.
>
> However, this function only gets called if the IRQ number is greater than
> 16 and acpi_irq_get_penalty function gets called before ACPI start in
> acpi_isa_irq_available and acpi_penalize_isa_irq functions. We can't rely
> on iterating the link list.
>
> We need to add the PCI_USING penalty for ISA interrupts too if the link is
> in use and matches our ISA IRQ number.
I think the history about the array size is more than is necessary for this
changelog. I think the useful part is something like this:
ACPI: pci_link: Include PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING for ISA IRQs
103544d86976 ("ACPI,PCI,IRQ: reduce resource requirements") replaced
the addition of PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING in acpi_pci_link_allocate()
with an addition in acpi_irq_pci_sharing_penalty(), but f7eca374f000
("ACPI,PCI,IRQ: separate ISA penalty calculation") removed the use
of acpi_irq_pci_sharing_penalty() for ISA IRQs.
Therefore, PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING is missing from ISA IRQs used by
interrupt links. Include that penalty by adding it in the
acpi_pci_link_allocate() path.
Fixes: f7eca374f000 ("ACPI,PCI,IRQ: separate ISA penalty calculation")
> Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>
Acked-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
> ---
> drivers/acpi/pci_link.c | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
> index c983bf7..a212709 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
> @@ -619,6 +619,10 @@ static int acpi_pci_link_allocate(struct acpi_pci_link *link)
> acpi_device_bid(link->device));
> return -ENODEV;
> } else {
> + if (link->irq.active < ACPI_MAX_ISA_IRQS)
> + acpi_isa_irq_penalty[link->irq.active] +=
> + PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING;
> +
> printk(KERN_WARNING PREFIX "%s [%s] enabled at IRQ %d\n",
> acpi_device_name(link->device),
> acpi_device_bid(link->device), link->irq.active);
> --
> 1.9.1
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-22 23:58 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
2016-10-21 3:01 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-19 22:24 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-22 23:58 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
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=20161022235837.GA1668@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).