On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:12:05AM +0000, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:

On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 03:45:35AM +0000, Hanjun Guo wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

+	if (trigger == ACPI_EDGE_SENSITIVE &&
+				polarity == ACPI_ACTIVE_LOW)
+		irq_type = IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING;
+	else if (trigger == ACPI_EDGE_SENSITIVE &&
+				polarity == ACPI_ACTIVE_HIGH)
+		irq_type = IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING;
+	else if (trigger == ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE &&
+				polarity == ACPI_ACTIVE_LOW)
+		irq_type = IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW;
+	else if (trigger == ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE &&
+				polarity == ACPI_ACTIVE_HIGH)
+		irq_type = IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH;
+	else
+		irq_type = IRQ_TYPE_NONE;
+
+	/*
+	 * Since only one GIC is supported in ACPI 5.0, we can
+	 * create mapping refer to the default domain
+	 */
+	irq = irq_create_mapping(NULL, gsi);
+	if (!irq)
+		return irq;
+
+	/* Set irq type if specified and different than the current one */
+	if (irq_type != IRQ_TYPE_NONE &&
+		irq_type != irq_get_trigger_type(irq))
+		irq_set_irq_type(irq, irq_type);
+	return irq;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_register_gsi);

I see you've still got this buried in the arch code. Is there any plan to
move it out, as I moaned about this in the last version of the series and
nothing seems to have changed?

Ah, sorry. Last time when I was in Hongkong for LCA this Feb, I
discussed with Lorenzo and he had a look into that too, he also met some
obstacles to do that, so Lorenzo said that he will talk to you about
this (Lorenzo, correct me if I'm wrong due to hearing problems of much
noise in that room where we were talking).

Anyway, if we move those functions to core code, such as irqdomain code,
which will be compiled for x86 too, we can only set those functions as
_weak, or we guard with them as #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64 ... #endif, so for
me, it's really not a big deal to move those code out of arch/arm64, but
I'm still open for suggestions if you can do that in a proper way.

You heard me clear and sound in HK, Will has a point and I looked into
this. Code is generic but not enough to be useful on other arches at
the moment, I need more time to look into this and see if we can move
this code to acpi core in a way that makes sense, to have, as you say,
a "default" implementation.

Yeah, just something guarded by a CONFIG option (probably not ARM64
though) would be enough, I think. Nothing too fancy.

Will