LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: "Li, Aubrey" <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "alan@linux.intel.com" <alan@linux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@linux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
arjan@linux.intel.com, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Len.Brown@intel.com, x86@kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Bypass legacy PIC and PIT on ACPI hardware reduced platform
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 06:31:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150304053106.GA3701@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54F69774.2050400@linux.intel.com>
* Li, Aubrey <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On 2015/3/4 13:08, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Li, Aubrey <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On ACPI hardware reduced platform, the legacy PIC and PIT may not be
> >> initialized even though they may be present in silicon. Touching
> >> these legacy components causes unexpected result on system.
> >>
> >> On Bay Trail-T(ASUS-T100) platform, touching these legacy components
> >> blocks platform hardware low idle power state(S0ix) during system suspend.
> >> So we should bypass them on ACPI hardware reduced platform.
> >>
> >> Suggested-by: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Li Aubrey <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>
> >> Cc: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
> >> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> >> ---
> >> arch/x86/kernel/irqinit.c | 6 +++++-
> >> arch/x86/kernel/time.c | 3 ++-
> >> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/irqinit.c b/arch/x86/kernel/irqinit.c
> >> index 70e181e..9a64cc3 100644
> >> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/irqinit.c
> >> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/irqinit.c
> >> @@ -75,7 +75,11 @@ void __init init_ISA_irqs(void)
> >> #if defined(CONFIG_X86_64) || defined(CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC)
> >> init_bsp_APIC();
> >> #endif
> >> - legacy_pic->init(0);
> >> + if (acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware) {
> >> + pr_info("Using NULL legacy PIC\n");
> >> + legacy_pic = &null_legacy_pic;
> >> + } else
> >> + legacy_pic->init(0);
> >>
> >> for (i = 0; i < nr_legacy_irqs(); i++)
> >> irq_set_chip_and_handler(i, chip, handle_level_irq);
> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/time.c b/arch/x86/kernel/time.c
> >> index 25adc0e..5ba94fa 100644
> >> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/time.c
> >> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/time.c
> >> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
> >> #include <linux/i8253.h>
> >> #include <linux/time.h>
> >> #include <linux/export.h>
> >> +#include <linux/acpi.h>
> >>
> >> #include <asm/vsyscall.h>
> >> #include <asm/x86_init.h>
> >> @@ -76,7 +77,7 @@ void __init setup_default_timer_irq(void)
> >> /* Default timer init function */
> >> void __init hpet_time_init(void)
> >> {
> >> - if (!hpet_enable())
> >> + if (!hpet_enable() && !acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware)
> >> setup_pit_timer();
> >> setup_default_timer_irq();
> >> }
> >
> > So the whole acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware flaggery sucks as it mixes
> > various hardware drivers that have little relation to each other...
> >
> > Instead of having a proper platform init this flag hooks into various
> > drivers and generic code, such as the efi reboot and shutdown code,
> > and now the generic irq init code.
> >
> > For this IRQ init problem, why not add a proper callback to
> > x86_platform_ops, define your own IRQ init function, initialize it in
> > your platform init sequence and let it be called? That solves it
> > without creating an ugly mix of different platform methods.
> >
> > For the EFI shutdown case, what's wrong with setting your own
> > pm_power_off handler like most of the other platforms are doing? Plus
> > the EFI code in drivers/firmware/efi/reboot.c should probably only set
> > the shutdown handler if pm_power_off is still NULL.
>
> I think our goal is to make the code as generic as possible for all
> x86 platform, rather than creating a new x86 branch, I added Alan
> Cox for this strategy discussion.
>
> Do you have any inputs for the patch itself?
Other than that the patch is unacceptable for an upstream merge in its
current form for the reason I mentioned? No.
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-04 5:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-03-04 3:23 Li, Aubrey
2015-03-04 5:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-03-04 5:26 ` Li, Aubrey
2015-03-04 5:31 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2015-03-04 6:04 ` Li, Aubrey
2015-03-04 7:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-03-04 8:43 ` Arjan van de Ven
2015-03-04 9:50 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-03-04 14:16 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-03-04 14:05 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-03-04 14:38 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-03-04 20:21 ` Alan Cox
2015-03-04 21:52 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-03-05 11:26 ` Li, Aubrey
2015-03-05 16:05 ` Alan Cox
2015-03-04 14:36 ` Arjan van de Ven
2015-03-04 20:11 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-03-05 11:13 ` Li, Aubrey
2015-03-05 11:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-03-05 12:42 ` Li, Aubrey
2015-03-05 16:06 ` Alan Cox
2015-03-09 23:26 ` Li, Aubrey
2015-03-10 8:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-03-11 4:14 ` Li, Aubrey
2015-03-04 20:18 ` Alan Cox
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=20150304053106.GA3701@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=Len.Brown@intel.com \
--cc=alan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=aubrey.li@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hpa@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--subject='Re: [PATCH] x86: Bypass legacy PIC and PIT on ACPI hardware reduced platform' \
/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
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).