Re: PIC probing code from e179f6914152 failing

[Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>]

On Mon, Oct 23 2023 at 11:17, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> On 10/23/2023 10:59, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> IOW NULL pic case has IORESOURCE_DISABLED / IORESOURCE_UNSET
>> 
>> So the real question is WHY are the DISABLED/UNSET flags not set in the
>> PIC case?

Do you have an answer for this?
 
>>> NULL case:
>>> handler:  handle_edge_irq
>>> dstate:   0x3740c208
>>>               IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW
>>>
>>> PIC case:
>>> handler:  handle_fasteoi_irq
>>> dstate:   0x3740e208
>>>               IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW
>>>               IRQD_LEVEL
>>>
>>> I guess something related to the callpath for mp_register_handler().
>> 
>> Guessing is not helpful.
>> 
>> There is a difference in how the allocation info is set up when legacy
>> PIC is enabled, but that does not explain the above resource flag
>> difference.
>
> I did a pile of printks and that's how I realized it's because of the 
> missing call to mp_register_handler() which is dependent upon what 
> appeared to me to be a superfluous number of legacy IRQs check (patch 1 
> in my solution).

What exactly is superfluous about these legacy checks?

Thanks,

        tglx