Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 Nov 2016 21:33:22 +0800 | From | Hanjun Guo <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH V6 2/3] ACPI: Add support for ResourceSource/IRQ domain mapping |
| |
Hi Lorenzo,
On 11/11/2016 01:58 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:02:35AM -0500, agustinv@codeaurora.org wrote: >> Hey Hanjun, >> >> On 2016-11-09 21:36, Hanjun Guo wrote: >>> Hi Marc, Rafael, Lorenzo, >>> >>> Since we agreed to add a probe deferral if we failed to get irq >>> resources which mirroring the DT does (patch 1 in this patch set), >>> I think the last blocker to make things work both for Agustin and >>> me [1] is this patch, which makes the interrupt producer and consumer >>> work in ACPI, we have two different solution for one thing, we'd happy >>> to work together for one solution, could you give some suggestions >>> please? >>> >>> [1]: https://mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1257419.html >>> >>> Agustin, I have some comments below. >>> >>> On 2016/10/29 4:48, Agustin Vega-Frias wrote: >>>> This allows irqchip drivers to associate an ACPI DSDT device to >>>> an IRQ domain and provides support for using the ResourceSource >>>> in Extended IRQ Resources to find the domain and map the IRQs >>>> specified on that domain. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Agustin Vega-Frias <agustinv@codeaurora.org> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/acpi/Makefile | 1 + >>>> drivers/acpi/irqdomain.c | 119 >>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> >>> Could we just reuse the gsi.c and not introduce a new >>> file, probably we can change the gsi.c to irqdomain.c >>> or something similar, then reuse the code in gsi.c. >> >> I was thinking just that after we chatted off-list. > > Yes, that's a fair point. > >> I might revisit and see what I come up with given that we already have >> a device argument and we could pass the IRQ source there. > > I agree with the approach taken by this patch, I do not like much > passing around struct acpi_resource_source *source (in particular > the dummy struct) I do not think it is needed, I will comment on > the code.
thanks for your time to have a look:)
> > Hopefully there is not any buggy FW out there that does use the > resource source inappropriately otherwise we will notice on x86/ia64 > (ie you can't blame FW if it breaks the kernel) but I suspect the > only way to find out is by trying, the patch has to go through Rafael's > review anyway before getting there so it is fine.
I think we can avoid that by not touching the logic that x86/ia64 already used, but only adding interrupt producer/consumer function.
Thanks Hanjun
| |