[PATCH V4 3/3] Revert "ACPI, PCI, IRQ: separate ISA penalty calculation"
From: helgaas@kernel.org (Bjorn Helgaas)
Date: 2016-10-21 02:31:18
Also in:
linux-acpi, linux-arm-msm, linux-pci, lkml
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 06:21:04PM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote:
This reverts commit f7eca374f000 ("ACPI,PCI,IRQ: separate ISA penalty
calculation") and commit 487cf917ed0d ("revert "ACPI, PCI, IRQ: remove
redundant code in acpi_irq_penalty_init()"").
Now that we understand the real issue (SCI and ISA penalty getting
calculated before ACPI start), there is no need for special handling
for ISA interrupts.
Let's try to simplify the code one more time to share code.
I'm sort of OK with this, but it's not exactly a revert of the above
(the commits you mention don't check "link->irq.initialized == 1".
Previously acpi_irq_penalty_init() looked at _PRS info ("possible"
IRQs), but now we won't. Maybe that's good; I dunno. But it should
be mentioned.
And I don't think it fixes a user-visible problem, so it doesn't need
to be applied immediately. I'm not sure this is worth doing by
itself; maybe it should wait until we can do more cleanup and think
about all these issues together?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <redacted> --- arch/x86/pci/acpi.c | 1 - drivers/acpi/pci_link.c | 44 +++++--------------------------------------- include/acpi/acpi_drivers.h | 1 - 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-)diff --git a/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c b/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c index 3cd6983..b2a4e2a 100644 --- a/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c +++ b/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c@@ -396,7 +396,6 @@ int __init pci_acpi_init(void) return -ENODEV; printk(KERN_INFO "PCI: Using ACPI for IRQ routing\n"); - acpi_irq_penalty_init(); pcibios_enable_irq = acpi_pci_irq_enable; pcibios_disable_irq = acpi_pci_irq_disable; x86_init.pci.init_irq = x86_init_noop;diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c index 294b190..dd14d78 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c@@ -478,7 +478,8 @@ static int acpi_irq_pci_sharing_penalty(int irq) * If a link is active, penalize its IRQ heavily * so we try to choose a different IRQ. */ - if (link->irq.active && link->irq.active == irq) + if ((link->irq.active && link->irq.active == irq) && + (link->irq.initialized == 1)) penalty += PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING; /*@@ -501,45 +502,10 @@ static int acpi_irq_get_penalty(int irq) penalty += sci_penalty; if (irq < ACPI_MAX_ISA_IRQS) - return penalty + acpi_isa_irq_penalty[irq]; + penalty += acpi_isa_irq_penalty[irq]; - return penalty + acpi_irq_pci_sharing_penalty(irq); -} - -int __init acpi_irq_penalty_init(void) -{ - struct acpi_pci_link *link; - int i; - - /* - * Update penalties to facilitate IRQ balancing. - */ - list_for_each_entry(link, &acpi_link_list, list) { - - /* - * reflect the possible and active irqs in the penalty table -- - * useful for breaking ties. - */ - if (link->irq.possible_count) { - int penalty = - PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_POSSIBLE / - link->irq.possible_count; - - for (i = 0; i < link->irq.possible_count; i++) { - if (link->irq.possible[i] < ACPI_MAX_ISA_IRQS) - acpi_isa_irq_penalty[link->irq. - possible[i]] += - penalty; - } - - } else if (link->irq.active && - (link->irq.active < ACPI_MAX_ISA_IRQS)) { - acpi_isa_irq_penalty[link->irq.active] += - PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_POSSIBLE; - } - } - - return 0; + penalty += acpi_irq_pci_sharing_penalty(irq); + return penalty; } static int acpi_irq_balance = -1; /* 0: static, 1: balance */diff --git a/include/acpi/acpi_drivers.h b/include/acpi/acpi_drivers.h index 29c6912..797ae2e 100644 --- a/include/acpi/acpi_drivers.h +++ b/include/acpi/acpi_drivers.h@@ -78,7 +78,6 @@ /* ACPI PCI Interrupt Link (pci_link.c) */ -int acpi_irq_penalty_init(void); int acpi_pci_link_allocate_irq(acpi_handle handle, int index, int *triggering, int *polarity, char **name); int acpi_pci_link_free_irq(acpi_handle handle);-- 1.9.1 _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel