[U-Boot] [PATCH 05/26] x86: irq: Enable SCI on IRQ9

Stefan Roese
2016-05-07T15:51:07Z

Hi Bin,

On 07.05.2016 17:46, Bin Meng wrote:
> On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 11:42 PM, Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de> wrote:
>> Hi Bin,
>>
>>
>> On 07.05.2016 16:06, Bin Meng wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 8:31 PM, Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Bin,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 02.05.2016 09:33, Bin Meng wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> By default SCI is disabled after power on. ACTL is the register to
>>>>> enable SCI and route it to PIC/APIC. To support both ACPI in PIC
>>>>> mode and APIC mode, configure SCI to use IRQ9.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> arch/x86/cpu/irq.c | 25
>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> arch/x86/include/asm/irq.h | 4 ++++
>>>>> doc/device-tree-bindings/misc/intel,irq-router.txt | 5 +++++
>>>>> 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/cpu/irq.c b/arch/x86/cpu/irq.c
>>>>> index ae90b0c..487ac23 100644
>>>>> --- a/arch/x86/cpu/irq.c
>>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/cpu/irq.c
>>>>> @@ -146,6 +146,9 @@ static int create_pirq_routing_table(struct udevice
>>>>> *dev)
>>>>> priv->ibase &= ~0xf;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> + priv->actl_8bit = fdtdec_get_bool(blob, node,
>>>>> "intel,actl-8bit");
>>>>> + priv->actl_addr = fdtdec_get_int(blob, node, "intel,actl-addr",
>>>>> 0);
>>>>> +
>>>>> cell = fdt_getprop(blob, node, "intel,pirq-routing", &len);
>>>>> if (!cell || len % sizeof(struct pirq_routing))
>>>>> return -EINVAL;
>>>>> @@ -215,6 +218,24 @@ static int create_pirq_routing_table(struct udevice
>>>>> *dev)
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_GENERATE_ACPI_TABLE
>>>>> +static void irq_enable_sci(struct udevice *dev)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + struct irq_router *priv = dev_get_priv(dev);
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (priv->actl_8bit) {
>>>>> + /* Bit7 must be turned on to enable ACPI */
>>>>> + dm_pci_write_config8(dev->parent, priv->actl_addr,
>>>>> 0x80);
>>>>> + } else {
>>>>> + /* Write 0 to enable SCI on IRQ9 */
>>>>> + if (priv->config == PIRQ_VIA_PCI)
>>>>> + dm_pci_write_config32(dev->parent,
>>>>> priv->actl_addr, 0);
>>>>> + else
>>>>> + writel(0, priv->ibase + priv->actl_addr);
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +#endif
>>>>> +
>>>>> int irq_router_common_init(struct udevice *dev)
>>>>> {
>>>>> int ret;
>>>>> @@ -228,6 +249,10 @@ int irq_router_common_init(struct udevice *dev)
>>>>> pirq_route_irqs(dev, pirq_routing_table->slots,
>>>>> get_irq_slot_count(pirq_routing_table));
>>>>>
>>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_GENERATE_ACPI_TABLE
>>>>> + irq_enable_sci(dev);
>>>>> +#endif
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Again, this could also use IS_ENABLED.
>>>>
>>>
>>> If changing to use IS_ENABLED here, buildman reports:
>>>
>>> 05: x86: irq: Enable SCI on IRQ9
>>> x86: + coreboot-x86 cougarcanyon2 minnowmax
>>> chromebox_panther chromebook_samus crownbay conga-qeval20-qa3-e3845
>>> efi-x86 bayleybay galileo chromebook_link
>>> + irq_enable_sci(dev);
>>> + ^
>>> w+../arch/x86/cpu/irq.c: In function 'irq_router_common_init':
>>> w+../arch/x86/cpu/irq.c:254:3: warning: implicit declaration of
>>> function 'irq_enable_sci' [-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
>>>
>>> This is due to irq_enable_sci() is wrapped by #ifdef
>>> CONFIG_GENERATE_ACPI_TABLE and I don't think IS_ENABLED can be used
>>> there.
>>
>>
>> Right. This only works in functions. I think the general rule is,
>> that the #ifdef in the code itself are much worse than "just"
>> around a whole function body. Thats why its okay (I think) to
>> do it this way.
>>
>
> So for this commit, leave it as it was?

What does the compiler generate when you remove the #ifdef
around the function body?

Thanks,
Stefan