From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752624Ab2AZPH2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jan 2012 10:07:28 -0500 Received: from paperboy.avencall.com ([91.194.178.22]:37457 "EHLO mx1.corp.avencall.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751574Ab2AZPH0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jan 2012 10:07:26 -0500 Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 16:07:19 +0100 From: Guillaume Knispel To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Cc: Guillaume Knispel , Len Brown , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Xavier Carcelle , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?No=E9?= Rubinstein Subject: Re: How to "register" a GSI for a non PCI non ISA device Message-ID: <20120126160719.3b9be3b3@xilun> In-Reply-To: <20120125190214.GC18606@phenom.dumpdata.com> References: <20120124184203.1b0878c2@xilun> <4F1F99A5.1000206@kernel.org> <20120125182314.7834c75b@xilun> <20120125190214.GC18606@phenom.dumpdata.com> Organization: Avencall X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.20.1; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:02:14 -0500 Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 06:23:14PM +0100, Guillaume Knispel wrote: > > On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 00:56:53 -0500 > > Len Brown wrote: > > > > > What is the benefit of implementing ACPI on this custom system? > > > > For our short term project it seems to be more a necessity than a > > benefit. ACPI is supported by the SoC, tables are already largely > > provided by Coreboot, the whole x86 ecosystem including Linux is more > > or less based around ACPI, and my whole interrogation comes from the > > fact that *acpi*_register_gsi() seems to be necessary to configure a > > GSI in the APIC but is not exported anymore, so my guess is that if I > > Hm, isn't it __acpi_register_gsi? __acpi_register_gsi exists on recent kernels, it is the pointer to the underlying implementation of that function depending on the platform (x86 / xen-x86) and on the variant of the platform (pic/apic). acpi_register_gsi still exists and it calls __acpi_register_gsi. > > can't call it explicitly from my LKM, there should better be a way to > > make it be called when an ACPI thing is done, or maybe a legacy table > > parsed. > > Can you do it the way xen does? Look in arch/x86/xen/pci.c Did not found this file. Besides, isn't Xen a separate architecture from mainline x86, compiled built-in? My goal is to only touch LKM and system firmware if necessary. > > As we first target an unmodified (if possible) 2.6.32 kernel from > > Debian Squeeze, I can't just re-export acpi_register_gsi() and call it > > a day. (If I've no other choice I'll obviously do it, but this would be > > quite bad for future maintenance). > > Oh wow. That is ancient. 3.2? 3.2 when a Debian stable will feature 3.2 :) -- Guillaume Knispel Avencall - 10 bis, rue Lucien Voilin - 92800 Puteaux