Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757250AbZAGNOR (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jan 2009 08:14:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751710AbZAGNOA (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jan 2009 08:14:00 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:59718 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751596AbZAGNN7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jan 2009 08:13:59 -0500 Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 14:13:48 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Jesse Barnes Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , LKML , Linux PCI , "H. Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86 PCI: Do not use interrupt links for devices using MSI-X Message-ID: <20090107131348.GE3529@elte.hu> References: <200901042308.42625.rjw@sisk.pl> <20090105130439.GA6014@elte.hu> <200901051153.07860.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200901051153.07860.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2111 Lines: 56 * Jesse Barnes wrote: > On Monday, January 5, 2009 5:04 am Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki > > > > > > pcibios_enable_device() and pcibios_disable_device() don't handle > > > IRQs for devices that have MSI enabled and it should tread the > > > > s/tread/treat > > > > > devices with MSI-X enabled in the same way. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki > > > --- > > > arch/x86/pci/common.c | 4 ++-- > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > looks good - Jesse, what do you think? > > Yeah, seems obviously correct, I'll queue it up. > > > Rafael, i'm curious is this in response to some regression/bug? Did some > > box or driver get confused by us enabling/disabling the GSI? Some IRQ > > flood perhaps? > > > > btw., there's a small observation: > > > + if (!dev->msi_enabled && !dev->msix_enabled) > > > > maybe a "pci_has_gsi_irq()" wrapper would make these checks cleaner and > > would make things more robust, should there be any new IRQ delivery method > > be introduced in the future? > > pci_has_msi_irq surely? Otherwise we'll catch pretty much everything? Or did > you mean !pci_has_gsi_irq() here instead? Well - here the check is: "if (not MSI or MSIX)" in essence. I thought that it might be confusing to call it _msi() as well, so we could approach it via the inverse space: general system interrupts (GSIs) - which are device irqs that are neither MSI nor MSIX. But if pci_has_msi_irq() can cleanly include the MSIX portion too, that's fine too. (MSI-X is really MSI with wider eventing capabilities but otherwise non-GSI just as much - and we dont want to enable (or even touch) the legacy IRQ line registers for any of them, even if they happen to be enumerated) Right? Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/