[PATCH v6 3/6] ACPI: HW reduced mode does not allow use of the FADT sci_interrupt field
From: Rafael J. Wysocki <hidden>
Date: 2014-01-10 23:20:33
Also in:
linux-acpi
On Friday, January 10, 2014 03:52:17 PM al.stone at linaro.org wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
From: Al Stone <redacted> In HW reduced mode, the use of the SCI interrupt is not allowed. In all those places that use the FADT sci_interrupt field, make sure we do not execute that path when in HW reduced mode. In the case of acpi_os_install_interrupt_handler() in osl.c, this allows us to open up the routine to installing interrupt handlers other than acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt regardless of whether we are in ACPI legacy mode or reduced HW mode; acpi_os_remove_interrupt_handler() changes to maintain symmetry. Signed-off-by: Al Stone <redacted> --- drivers/acpi/bus.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++-------------- drivers/acpi/osl.c | 18 +++++++----------- drivers/acpi/pci_link.c | 2 ++ 3 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)diff --git a/drivers/acpi/bus.c b/drivers/acpi/bus.c index 0710004..d871859 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/bus.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/bus.c@@ -552,21 +552,23 @@ void __init acpi_early_init(void) } #ifdef CONFIG_X86 - if (!acpi_ioapic) { - /* compatible (0) means level (3) */ - if (!(acpi_sci_flags & ACPI_MADT_TRIGGER_MASK)) { - acpi_sci_flags &= ~ACPI_MADT_TRIGGER_MASK; - acpi_sci_flags |= ACPI_MADT_TRIGGER_LEVEL;
I wonder why exactly you want to make this change. It surely doesn't matter for ARM and do you have any HW-reduced x86 hardware to test it?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+ if (!acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware) { + if (!acpi_ioapic) { + /* compatible (0) means level (3) */ + if (!(acpi_sci_flags & ACPI_MADT_TRIGGER_MASK)) { + acpi_sci_flags &= ~ACPI_MADT_TRIGGER_MASK; + acpi_sci_flags |= ACPI_MADT_TRIGGER_LEVEL; + } + /* Set PIC-mode SCI trigger type */ + acpi_pic_sci_set_trigger(acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt, + (acpi_sci_flags & ACPI_MADT_TRIGGER_MASK) >> 2); + } else { + /* + * now that acpi_gbl_FADT is initialized, + * update it with result from INT_SRC_OVR parsing + */ + acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt = acpi_sci_override_gsi; } - /* Set PIC-mode SCI trigger type */ - acpi_pic_sci_set_trigger(acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt, - (acpi_sci_flags & ACPI_MADT_TRIGGER_MASK) >> 2); - } else { - /* - * now that acpi_gbl_FADT is initialized, - * update it with result from INT_SRC_OVR parsing - */ - acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt = acpi_sci_override_gsi; } #endifdiff --git a/drivers/acpi/osl.c b/drivers/acpi/osl.c index 44c07eb..c946a3a 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/osl.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/osl.c@@ -84,6 +84,7 @@ static int (*__acpi_os_prepare_extended_sleep)(u8 sleep_state, u32 val_a, static acpi_osd_handler acpi_irq_handler; static void *acpi_irq_context; +static u32 acpi_irq_number; static struct workqueue_struct *kacpid_wq; static struct workqueue_struct *kacpi_notify_wq; static struct workqueue_struct *kacpi_hotplug_wq;@@ -178,6 +179,10 @@ static void __init acpi_request_region (struct acpi_generic_address *gas, static int __init acpi_reserve_resources(void) { + /* Handle hardware reduced mode: i.e., do nothing. */ + if (acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware) + return 0;
Does it actually break things if we do that?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+ acpi_request_region(&acpi_gbl_FADT.xpm1a_event_block, acpi_gbl_FADT.pm1_event_length, "ACPI PM1a_EVT_BLK");@@ -795,13 +800,6 @@ acpi_os_install_interrupt_handler(u32 gsi, acpi_osd_handler handler, acpi_irq_stats_init(); - /* - * ACPI interrupts different from the SCI in our copy of the FADT are - * not supported. - */ - if (gsi != acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt) - return AE_BAD_PARAMETER; - if (acpi_irq_handler) return AE_ALREADY_ACQUIRED;@@ -818,15 +816,13 @@ acpi_os_install_interrupt_handler(u32 gsi, acpi_osd_handler handler, acpi_irq_handler = NULL; return AE_NOT_ACQUIRED; } + acpi_irq_number = irq; return AE_OK; } acpi_status acpi_os_remove_interrupt_handler(u32 irq, acpi_osd_handler handler) { - if (irq != acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt) - return AE_BAD_PARAMETER; - free_irq(irq, acpi_irq); acpi_irq_handler = NULL;@@ -1806,7 +1802,7 @@ acpi_status __init acpi_os_initialize1(void) acpi_status acpi_os_terminate(void) { if (acpi_irq_handler) { - acpi_os_remove_interrupt_handler(acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt, + acpi_os_remove_interrupt_handler(acpi_irq_number, acpi_irq_handler); }diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c index 2652a61..d5c155e 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c@@ -505,6 +505,8 @@ int __init acpi_irq_penalty_init(void) } } /* Add a penalty for the SCI */ + if (acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware) + return 0; acpi_irq_penalty[acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt] += PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING; return 0; }
Is ARM really going to use the code in pci_link.c? If so, then how exactly? Rafael