Re: [PATCH V1 1/1] X86: Probe for PIC and set legacy_pic appropriately

Re: [PATCH V1 1/1] X86: Probe for PIC and set legacy_pic appropriately

[H. Peter Anvin]

On 04/11/2014 05:50 PM, K. Y. Srinivasan wrote:
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * Check to see if we have a PIC.
> +	 * Mask all except the cascade and read
> +	 * back the value we just wrote. If we don't
> +	 * have a PIC, we will read 0xff as opposed to the
> +	 * value we wrote.
> +	 */
> +	outb(probe_val, PIC_MASTER_IMR);
> +	probe_val = inb(PIC_MASTER_IMR);
> +	if (probe_val == 0xff) {
> +		printk(KERN_INFO "Using NULL legacy PIC\n");
> +		legacy_pic = &null_legacy_pic;
> +		raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&i8259A_lock, flags);
> +		return;
> +	}
> +
>  	outb(0xff, PIC_MASTER_IMR);	/* mask all of 8259A-1 */
>  	outb(0xff, PIC_SLAVE_IMR);	/* mask all of 8259A-2 */
>  

Again, I would do at least the slave masking above the probe.

Also, I would compare to make sure we get the probe_val back and compare
with != instead of comparing with ==.

	-hpa

[PATCH V1 1/1] X86: Probe for PIC and set legacy_pic appropriately

[K. Y. Srinivasan]

Probe for the existance of legacy PIC, if one does not exist, use the
null_legacy_pic.

This patch implements the proposal put forth by H. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com>.

In this version of the patch I have cleaned up the code based on comments from
Peter.

Signed-off-by: K. Y. Srinivasan <kys@microsoft.com>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mshyperv.c |    2 --
 arch/x86/kernel/i8259.c        |   17 +++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mshyperv.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mshyperv.c
index 47359f7..9ca9587 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mshyperv.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mshyperv.c
@@ -133,8 +133,6 @@ static void __init ms_hyperv_init_platform(void)
 		printk(KERN_INFO "HyperV: LAPIC Timer Frequency: %#x\n",
 				lapic_timer_frequency);
 
-		printk(KERN_INFO "HyperV: Using null_legacy_pic\n");
-		legacy_pic = &null_legacy_pic;
 	}
 #endif
 
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/i8259.c b/arch/x86/kernel/i8259.c
index 2e977b5..89c7313 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/i8259.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/i8259.c
@@ -299,11 +299,28 @@ static void unmask_8259A(void)
 static void init_8259A(int auto_eoi)
 {
 	unsigned long flags;
+	unsigned char probe_val = ~(1 << PIC_CASCADE_IR);
 
 	i8259A_auto_eoi = auto_eoi;
 
 	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&i8259A_lock, flags);
 
+	/*
+	 * Check to see if we have a PIC.
+	 * Mask all except the cascade and read
+	 * back the value we just wrote. If we don't
+	 * have a PIC, we will read 0xff as opposed to the
+	 * value we wrote.
+	 */
+	outb(probe_val, PIC_MASTER_IMR);
+	probe_val = inb(PIC_MASTER_IMR);
+	if (probe_val == 0xff) {
+		printk(KERN_INFO "Using NULL legacy PIC\n");
+		legacy_pic = &null_legacy_pic;
+		raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&i8259A_lock, flags);
+		return;
+	}
+
 	outb(0xff, PIC_MASTER_IMR);	/* mask all of 8259A-1 */
 	outb(0xff, PIC_SLAVE_IMR);	/* mask all of 8259A-2 */
 
-- 
1.7.4.1

RE: [PATCH V1 1/1] X86: Probe for PIC and set legacy_pic appropriately

[KY Srinivasan]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8", Size: 1499 bytes --]



> -----Original Message-----
> From: H. Peter Anvin [mailto:hpa@zytor.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 11, 2014 4:59 PM
> To: KY Srinivasan; x86@kernel.org; gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; linux-
> kernel@vger.kernel.org; devel@linuxdriverproject.org; olaf@aepfle.de;
> apw@canonical.com; jasowang@redhat.com; tglx@linutronix.de;
> JBeulich@suse.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 1/1] X86: Probe for PIC and set legacy_pic
> appropriately
> 
> On 04/11/2014 05:50 PM, K. Y. Srinivasan wrote:
> >
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Check to see if we have a PIC.
> > +	 * Mask all except the cascade and read
> > +	 * back the value we just wrote. If we don't
> > +	 * have a PIC, we will read 0xff as opposed to the
> > +	 * value we wrote.
> > +	 */
> > +	outb(probe_val, PIC_MASTER_IMR);
> > +	probe_val = inb(PIC_MASTER_IMR);
> > +	if (probe_val == 0xff) {
> > +		printk(KERN_INFO "Using NULL legacy PIC\n");
> > +		legacy_pic = &null_legacy_pic;
> > +		raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&i8259A_lock, flags);
> > +		return;
> > +	}
> > +
> >  	outb(0xff, PIC_MASTER_IMR);	/* mask all of 8259A-1 */
> >  	outb(0xff, PIC_SLAVE_IMR);	/* mask all of 8259A-2 */
> >
> 
> Again, I would do at least the slave masking above the probe.
> 
> Also, I would compare to make sure we get the probe_val back and compare
> with != instead of comparing with ==.

Will do.

Thanks,

K. Y

ÿôèº{.nÇ+‰·Ÿ®‰­†+%ŠËÿ±éݶ\x17¥Šwÿº{.nÇ+‰·¥Š{±þG«éÿŠ{ayº\x1dʇڙë,j\a­¢f£¢·hšïêÿ‘êçz_è®\x03(­éšŽŠÝ¢j"ú\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿ¾\a«þG«éÿ¢¸?™¨è­Ú&£ø§~á¶iO•æ¬z·švØ^\x14\x04\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿÃ\fÿ¶ìÿ¢¸?–I¥