From: Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, rjw@rjwysocki.net,
bhelgaas@google.com, ravikanth.nalla@hpe.com,
linux@rainbow-software.org, timur@codeaurora.org,
cov@codeaurora.org, jcm@redhat.com, alex.williamson@redhat.com,
x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, agross@codeaurora.org,
Robert Moore <robert.moore@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@intel.com>,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, wim@djo.tudelft.nl,
devel@acpica.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 3/3] Revert "ACPI, PCI, IRQ: separate ISA penalty calculation"
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 19:58:57 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8dcd59ac-815b-da71-a3f2-ba533c4182c9@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161021023109.GD31044@localhost>
On 10/20/2016 7:31 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> 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".
I can split the initialized bit. If I remove it from this commit, it can
break the git bisect. That's why, I folded it into this review. I
briefly mentioned about it in the cover letter. It might not be quiet
clear.
>
> 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.
I'm directing all IRQs to acpi_irq_pci_sharing_penalty function.
acpi_irq_pci_sharing_penalty checks for the possible values here from
_PRS.
/*
* penalize the IRQs PCI might use, but not as severely.
*/
for (i = 0; i < link->irq.possible_count; i++)
if (link->irq.possible[i] == irq)
penalty += PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_POSSIBLE /
link->irq.possible_count;
>
> 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?
>
It does fix the PCI_USING penalty assignment.
if (link->irq.active && link->irq.active == irq)
penalty += PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING;
If we drop this patch, then we need
[PATCH V3 1/3] ACPI, PCI IRQ: add PCI_USING penalty for ISA interrupts
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/2547605
as somebody needs to increment the penalty with PCI_USING when IRQ is assigned
for a given ISA IRQ.
We might as well take [PATCH V4 1/3], [PATCH V4 2/3] and [PATCH V3 1/3]
for this regression.
--
Sinan Kaya
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc.
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-21 2:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1476915664-27231-1-git-send-email-okaya@codeaurora.org>
2016-10-19 22:21 ` [PATCH V4 1/3] ACPI, PCI, IRQ: assign ISA IRQ directly during early boot stages Sinan Kaya
2016-10-20 21:39 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-10-24 3:48 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-21 1:39 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-10-21 14:07 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-10-24 3:22 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-23 3:48 ` [V4, " Jonathan Liu
2016-10-24 4:17 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-24 4:21 ` Jonathan Liu
2016-10-19 22:21 ` [PATCH V4 2/3] Revert "ACPI,PCI,IRQ: remove SCI penalize function" Sinan Kaya
2016-10-21 1:58 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-10-21 14:45 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-10-21 16:13 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-22 14:57 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-10-24 3:48 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-22 23:28 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-10-24 3:48 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-23 3:49 ` [V4,2/3] " Jonathan Liu
2016-10-19 22:21 ` [PATCH V4 3/3] Revert "ACPI,PCI,IRQ: separate ISA penalty calculation" Sinan Kaya
2016-10-21 2:31 ` [PATCH V4 3/3] Revert "ACPI, PCI, IRQ: " Bjorn Helgaas
2016-10-21 2:58 ` Sinan Kaya [this message]
2016-10-22 23:59 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-10-24 4:16 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-10-23 3:49 ` [V4,3/3] Revert "ACPI,PCI,IRQ: " Jonathan Liu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=8dcd59ac-815b-da71-a3f2-ba533c4182c9@codeaurora.org \
--to=okaya@codeaurora.org \
--cc=agross@codeaurora.org \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=cov@codeaurora.org \
--cc=devel@acpica.org \
--cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jcm@redhat.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@rainbow-software.org \
--cc=lv.zheng@intel.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=ravikanth.nalla@hpe.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=robert.moore@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=timur@codeaurora.org \
--cc=wim@djo.tudelft.nl \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome