Linux Power Management development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
	Nick Meier <nmeier@microsoft.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	x86@kernel.org,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Patch v2] x86, ACPI, irq: Add a quirk to override SCI polarity for HyperV
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 11:15:18 +0200 (CEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1508201111480.3873@nanos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55D57160.40108@linux.intel.com>

On Thu, 20 Aug 2015, Jiang Liu wrote:
> On 2015/8/19 16:40, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Wed, 19 Aug 2015, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >> On Wed, 19 Aug 2015, Jiang Liu wrote:
> >>> On 2015/8/19 14:45, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >>>> Well, the regression at hand has just shown that the assertion in the
> >>>> changelog of that commit ("no need for for special treatment for GSI
> >>>> used by ACPI SCI") does not really hold.  So, if the only motivation
> >>>> for it was to get rid of one extra check in mp_unregister_gsi()
> >>>> (mp_register_gsi() still needs to check if it is dealing with the SCI
> >>>> anyway), I'd vote for reverting it.
> >>> Hi Rafael,
> >>> 	The motivation is to treat SCI as normal IOAPIC interrupt so
> >>> we could enforce stricter pin attribute checking. Now it does reveal
> >>> flaws in ACPI BIOS implementations, but we ran into trouble about how to
> >>> handle those flaws:(
> >>
> >> The intent of this change is entirely correct, though it seems that
> >> reality of ACPI is just different.
> >>
> >> To be on the safe side of things, I agree with Rafael that we should
> >> revert that patch instead of introducing a single platform quirk.
> > 
> > Jiang,
> > 
> > can you please prepare a revert patch for this?
> Hi Rafael and Thomas,
> 	I have tried to revert commit cd68f6bd53cf, but found
> it's not an easy task now.

That's what I feared

> 	When converting to hierarchical irqdomain, the IOAPIC
> internal and interfaces have changed much, and seems no easy
> way to revert cd68f6bd53cf. There may be three possible solutions
> here:
> 1) use quirk to correct SCI polarity, as the patch does.
> 2) change IOAPIC interfaces to provide a special way to
>    handle SCI interrupt.
> 3) change drivers/acpi/pci_link.c to penalize SCI IRQ so it
>    won't be used for PCI IRQ if SCI polarity conflicts with
>    PCI IRQ polarity.

Stupid question. Is the SCI polarity ever the opposite of PCI
polarity? I.e. is such a ACPI override valid at all? 

Thanks,

	tglx

  reply	other threads:[~2015-08-20  9:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-08-09  8:58 [Patch v1] x86, ACPI, irq: Fix a regression caused by Jiang Liu
2015-08-18 19:36 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-08-19  5:53   ` [Patch v2] x86, ACPI, irq: Add a quirk to override SCI polarity for HyperV Jiang Liu
2015-08-19  6:04     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-08-19  6:26       ` Jiang Liu
2015-08-19  6:45         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-08-19  6:53           ` Jiang Liu
2015-08-19  8:29             ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-08-19  8:40               ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-08-19  9:05                 ` Jiang Liu
2015-08-20  6:19                 ` Jiang Liu
2015-08-20  9:15                   ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2015-08-20  9:35                     ` Jiang Liu
2015-08-20 11:13                       ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-08-21  7:36                         ` [Patch v3] ACPI, PCI: Penalize legacy IRQ used by ACPI SCI Jiang Liu
2015-08-25  8:01                           ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-08-26  2:42                             ` Aaron Lu
2015-08-26  7:56                               ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-08-26  9:27                               ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-08-26 20:22                                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-08-26 22:07                                   ` Thomas Gleixner

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=alpine.DEB.2.11.1508201111480.3873@nanos \
    --to=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jiang.liu@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=len.brown@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=nmeier@microsoft.com \
    --cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
    --cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /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