summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorSinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>2016-06-29 04:27:35 -0400
committerRafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>2016-07-02 01:38:34 +0200
commit4a6e68bf96c1fa293717d2f00a68a68c92fa4150 (patch)
tree56c64f7c97a006288ca0bbb40068c6c8ae8fa574 /drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
parent54794580f5949253520265e46c903878ab222d84 (diff)
ACPI,PCI,IRQ: factor in PCI possible
The change introduced in commit 103544d86976 (ACPI,PCI,IRQ: reduce resource requirements) omitted the initially applied PCI_POSSIBLE penalty when the IRQ is active. Incorrect calculation of the penalty leads the ACPI code to assigning a wrong interrupt number to a PCI INTx interrupt. This would not be as bad as it sounds in theory. It would just cause the interrupts to be shared and result in performance penalty. However, some drivers (like the parallel port driver) don't like interrupt sharing and in the above case they will causes all of the PCI drivers wanting to share the interrupt to be unable to request it. The issue has not been caught in testing because the behavior is platform-specific and depends on the peripherals ending up sharing the IRQ and their drivers. Before the above commit the code would add the PCI_POSSIBLE value divided by the number of possible IRQ users to the IRQ penalty during initialization. Later in that code path, if the IRQ is chosen as the active IRQ or if it is used by ISA; additional penalties are added. Fixes: 103544d86976 (ACPI,PCI,IRQ: reduce resource requirements) Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org> Tested-by: Wim Osterholt <wim@djo.tudelft.nl> [ rjw: Changelog ] Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'drivers/acpi/pci_link.c')
-rw-r--r--drivers/acpi/pci_link.c21
1 files changed, 9 insertions, 12 deletions
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
index 4ed4061813e6..db7be62a8222 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
@@ -470,6 +470,7 @@ static int acpi_irq_pci_sharing_penalty(int irq)
{
struct acpi_pci_link *link;
int penalty = 0;
+ int i;
list_for_each_entry(link, &acpi_link_list, list) {
/*
@@ -478,18 +479,14 @@ static int acpi_irq_pci_sharing_penalty(int irq)
*/
if (link->irq.active && link->irq.active == irq)
penalty += PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING;
- else {
- int i;
-
- /*
- * If a link is inactive, penalize the IRQs it
- * 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;
- }
+
+ /*
+ * 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;
}
return penalty;