lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Aug]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2.6.27-rc4] irq: irq and pci_ids patch for Intel Ibex Peak DeviceIDs
On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 08:18:19 -0700, Heasley, Seth wrote:
> >On Thursday, August 28, 2008 12:49 am Jean Delvare wrote:
> >> Hi Seth,
> >>
> >> On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 16:58:26 -0700, Seth Heasley wrote:
> >> > This patch updates the Intel Ibex Peak (PCH) LPC and SMBus Controller
> >> > DeviceIDs.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Seth Heasley <seth.heasley@intel.com>
> >> >
> >> > --- linux-2.6/include/linux/pci_ids.h.orig 2008-08-27
> >11:54:07.000000000
> >> > -0700 +++ linux-2.6/include/linux/pci_ids.h 2008-08-27
> >12:01:53.000000000
> >> > -0700 @@ -2428,9 +2428,39 @@
> >> > #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_ICH10_3 0x3a1a
> >> > #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_ICH10_4 0x3a30
> >> > #define PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_ICH10_5 0x3a60
> >> > -#define PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_0 0x3b10
> >> > -#define PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_1 0x3b11
> >> > -#define PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_2 0x3b30
> >> > +#define PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_0 0x3b00
> >> > +#define PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_1 0x3b01
> >> > +#define PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_2 0x3b02
> >>
> >> Changing device ID definitions that way is really bad practice. It
> >> needs to be synchronized between all involved subsystems.
> >>
> >> > --- linux-2.6/arch/x86/pci/irq.c.orig 2008-08-27
> >11:53:13.000000000 -0700
> >> > +++ linux-2.6/arch/x86/pci/irq.c 2008-08-27 12:07:21.000000000 -0700
> >> > @@ -592,6 +592,36 @@
> >> > case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_ICH10_3:
> >> > case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_0:
> >> > case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_1:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_2:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_3:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_4:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_5:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_6:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_7:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_8:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_9:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_10:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_11:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_12:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_13:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_14:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_15:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_16:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_17:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_18:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_19:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_20:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_21:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_22:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_23:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_24:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_25:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_26:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_27:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_28:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_29:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_30:
> >> > + case PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PCH_31:
> >>
> >> I am no PCI IRQ routing expert, but I have to admit that I a bit
> >> skeptical that all the PCH functions are IRQ routers. You're adding as
> >> many entries here for the PCH than there have been for all Intel chips
> >> in the past 10 years or so...
> >>
> >> > r->name = "PIIX/ICH";
> >> > r->get = pirq_piix_get;
> >> > r->set = pirq_piix_set;
> >
> >Yeah, this has me confused now too. I remember specifically asking if the
> >other PCHs needed to be added to this list when the last patch was applied..
> >What happened? Can you give us some more background here, Seth? The
> >changelog should definitely include an explanation of why the IDs need to
> >be
> >changed (i.e. why the old commit was wrong).
> >
> >Thanks,
> >--
> >Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
>
> I'm not sure what's "messy," given that I changed what was required
> to be changed, then added the new IDs. These IDs are as follows:
>
> LPC Controller: 3b00-3b1f (final ID set in Firmware, but 32 possibilities)
> SMBus: 3b30
>
> In terms of the irq stuff, I'm adding only the LPC Controller IDs
> there. There are just a lot of them. Normally we have a handful of
> IDs, but in this case the list is longer.

So basically, you (Intel) have no clue what IDs will be used, and
instead of waiting until you have the information, you prefer to add a
bunch of device IDs to the Linux kernel, most of which will never
exist? This is making the kernel code bigger and slower. Not by much,
but still... That's bad engineering, really. Especially if you don't
clean up afterwards, as happens to be the case for the ICH10. I
compared the ICH10 datasheet with the IDs we have in the kernel and
only 3 of the 6 defined device IDs are actually used by existing ICH10
chips.

> I suppose what "messy" means is, I should have kept the existing
> defines and only added the new? I can resubmit if that's the way
> it should be done.

That's one part of the messiness, yes. Which underlines how bad the
symbol naming scheme is to start with.

> I will also patch the Documentation file. It wasn't in the list I
> was given by Jason, but I'm onboard with saving Jean the trouble.

Thanks.

> Please advise on how I should proceed here.

I gave my opinion on it - now up to Jesse to decide.

--
Jean Delvare


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-08-28 17:35    [W:0.032 / U:31.712 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site