Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933649AbcJUOIW (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Oct 2016 10:08:22 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.136]:49904 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933366AbcJUOIJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Oct 2016 10:08:09 -0400 Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 09:07:59 -0500 From: Bjorn Helgaas To: Sinan Kaya Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net, bhelgaas@google.com, ravikanth.nalla@hpe.com, linux@rainbow-software.org, timur@codeaurora.org, cov@codeaurora.org, jcm@redhat.com, alex.williamson@redhat.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, agross@codeaurora.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, wim@djo.tudelft.nl, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Len Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/3] ACPI, PCI, IRQ: assign ISA IRQ directly during early boot stages Message-ID: <20161021140759.GA877@localhost> References: <1476915664-27231-1-git-send-email-okaya@codeaurora.org> <1476915664-27231-2-git-send-email-okaya@codeaurora.org> <20161021013930.GB31044@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161021013930.GB31044@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2242 Lines: 46 On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 08:39:30PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 06:21:02PM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote: > > The penalty determination of ISA IRQ goes through 4 paths. > > 1. assign PCI_USING during power up via acpi_irq_penalty_init. > > 2. update the penalty with acpi_penalize_isa_irq function based on the > > active parameter. > > 3. kernel command line penalty update via acpi_irq_penalty_update function. > > 4. increment the penalty as USING right after the IRQ is assign to PCI. > > > > acpi_penalize_isa_irq and acpi_irq_penalty_update functions get called > > before the ACPI subsystem is started. > > > > These API need to bypass the acpi_irq_get_penalty function. > > I don't mind this patch, but the changelog doesn't tell me what's > broken and why we need this fix. Apparently acpi_irq_get_penalty() > doesn't work before ACPI is initialized, but I don't see *why* it > wouldn't work. > > However, I see one bug it *does* fix: we do not store the SCI penalty > in the acpi_isa_irq_penalty[] table because acpi_isa_irq_penalty[] > only holds ISA IRQ penalties, and there's no guarantee that the SCI is > an ISA IRQ. But prior to this patch, we added in the SCI penalty to > the acpi_isa_irq_penalty[] entry when the SCI was an ISA IRQ, which > makes acpi_irq_get_penalty() return the wrong thing. Consider: > > Initially acpi_isa_irq_penalty[9] = 0. > Assume sci_interrupt = 9. > Then acpi_irq_get_penalty(9) returns X. > If we call acpi_penalize_isa_irq(9, 1), > it sets acpi_isa_irq_penalty[9] = X, > and now acpi_irq_get_penalty(9) returns X + X. Oops, I forgot the penalty we *intended* to add with acpi_penalize_isa_irq(). It's really like this, where X is the SCI penalty and Y is the part added by acpi_penalize_isa_irq(): Initially acpi_isa_irq_penalty[9] = 0. Assume sci_interrupt = 9. Then acpi_irq_get_penalty(9) returns X. If we call acpi_penalize_isa_irq(9, 1), it sets acpi_isa_irq_penalty[9] = X + Y, and now acpi_irq_get_penalty(9) returns X + X + Y. At the end, acpi_irq_get_penalty(9) *should* return X + Y, but instead it returns X + X + Y, i.e., the SCI penalty is included twice.