From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Rui Wang <rui.y.wang@intel.com>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, rjw@rjwysocki.net, tony.luck@intel.com,
bhelgaas@google.com, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/3] x86/ioapic: Support hot-removal of IOAPICs present during boot
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 11:43:04 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160610164304.GJ19309@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1465378364-5982-1-git-send-email-rui.y.wang@intel.com>
On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 05:32:44PM +0800, Rui Wang wrote:
> v3: Previous versions break mips. This version fixes it.
>
> IOAPICs present during system boot aren't added to ioapic_list,
> thus are unable to be hot-removed. Fix it by calling
> acpi_ioapic_add() during root bus enumeration.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rui Wang <rui.y.wang@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/acpi/internal.h | 2 --
> drivers/acpi/ioapic.c | 7 ++++---
> drivers/acpi/pci_root.c | 2 +-
> drivers/pci/setup-bus.c | 7 ++++++-
> include/linux/acpi.h | 3 +++
> 5 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/internal.h b/drivers/acpi/internal.h
> index 9bb0773..bb567a7 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/internal.h
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/internal.h
> @@ -40,10 +40,8 @@ int acpi_sysfs_init(void);
> void acpi_container_init(void);
> void acpi_memory_hotplug_init(void);
> #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_HOTPLUG_IOAPIC
> -int acpi_ioapic_add(struct acpi_pci_root *root);
> int acpi_ioapic_remove(struct acpi_pci_root *root);
> #else
> -static inline int acpi_ioapic_add(struct acpi_pci_root *root) { return 0; }
> static inline int acpi_ioapic_remove(struct acpi_pci_root *root) { return 0; }
> #endif
> #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_DOCK
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/ioapic.c b/drivers/acpi/ioapic.c
> index ccdc8db..0f272e2 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/ioapic.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/ioapic.c
> @@ -189,16 +189,17 @@ exit:
> return AE_OK;
> }
>
> -int acpi_ioapic_add(struct acpi_pci_root *root)
> +int acpi_ioapic_add(acpi_handle root_handle)
> {
> acpi_status status, retval = AE_OK;
>
> - status = acpi_walk_namespace(ACPI_TYPE_DEVICE, root->device->handle,
> + status = acpi_walk_namespace(ACPI_TYPE_DEVICE, root_handle,
> UINT_MAX, handle_ioapic_add, NULL,
> - root->device->handle, (void **)&retval);
> + root_handle, (void **)&retval);
>
> return ACPI_SUCCESS(status) && ACPI_SUCCESS(retval) ? 0 : -ENODEV;
> }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_ioapic_add);
>
> int acpi_ioapic_remove(struct acpi_pci_root *root)
> {
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c
> index ae3fe4e..53f5965 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c
> @@ -614,7 +614,7 @@ static int acpi_pci_root_add(struct acpi_device *device,
> if (hotadd) {
> pcibios_resource_survey_bus(root->bus);
> pci_assign_unassigned_root_bus_resources(root->bus);
> - acpi_ioapic_add(root);
> + acpi_ioapic_add(root->device->handle);
> }
>
> pci_lock_rescan_remove();
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c b/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c
> index 55641a3..0658921 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c
> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
> #include <linux/ioport.h>
> #include <linux/cache.h>
> #include <linux/slab.h>
> +#include <linux/acpi.h>
> #include "pci.h"
>
> unsigned int pci_flags;
> @@ -1779,8 +1780,12 @@ void __init pci_assign_unassigned_resources(void)
> {
> struct pci_bus *root_bus;
>
> - list_for_each_entry(root_bus, &pci_root_buses, node)
> + list_for_each_entry(root_bus, &pci_root_buses, node) {
> pci_assign_unassigned_root_bus_resources(root_bus);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86
> + acpi_ioapic_add(ACPI_HANDLE(root_bus->bridge));
> +#endif
This seems like a strange place to call acpi_ioapic_add(). Your
object is to call acpi_ioapic_add() during root bus enumeration.
I assume we *can't* call acpi_ioapic_add() from acpi_pci_root_add() at
boot time, for some reason you'll explain. But is there a reason we
have to call it from pci_assign_unassigned_resources() (where it
requires an ifdef) instead of from pcibios_assign_resources(), which
is already x86-specific?
In acpi_pci_root_add(), we have this:
acpi_pci_root_add(...)
{
...
if (hotadd)
acpi_ioapic_add(root);
So the obvious question is why don't we just remove the "if (hotadd)"
and call acpi_ioapic_add() always.
I'm sure the reason is some ordering problem, but we need a comment in
acpi_pci_root_add() about why the obvious solution doesn't work.
> + }
> }
>
> void pci_assign_unassigned_bridge_resources(struct pci_dev *bridge)
> diff --git a/include/linux/acpi.h b/include/linux/acpi.h
> index 288fac5..3ed22df 100644
> --- a/include/linux/acpi.h
> +++ b/include/linux/acpi.h
> @@ -262,6 +262,9 @@ int acpi_unmap_cpu(int cpu);
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_HOTPLUG_IOAPIC
> int acpi_get_ioapic_id(acpi_handle handle, u32 gsi_base, u64 *phys_addr);
> +int acpi_ioapic_add(acpi_handle root);
> +#else
> +static inline int acpi_ioapic_add(acpi_handle root) { return 0; }
> #endif
>
> int acpi_register_ioapic(acpi_handle handle, u64 phys_addr, u32 gsi_base);
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-10 16:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-08 6:59 [PATCH V2 0/3] ioapic hot-removal bugs Rui Wang
2016-06-08 6:59 ` [PATCH V2 1/3] x86/ioapic: Support hot-removal of IOAPICs present during boot Rui Wang
2016-06-08 8:05 ` kbuild test robot
2016-06-08 9:32 ` [PATCH V3 " Rui Wang
2016-06-10 12:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-06-10 13:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-06-10 16:43 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2016-06-12 6:06 ` Rui Wang
2016-06-16 17:09 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-06-22 7:13 ` Rui Wang
2016-06-22 14:53 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-06-24 15:18 ` Rui Wang
2016-06-22 7:40 ` [PATCH V4 " Rui Wang
2016-06-22 15:14 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-06-23 5:11 `
2016-06-23 17:34 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-06-24 15:30 ` Rui Wang
2016-06-26 3:44 ` [PATCH V5 " Rui Wang
2016-08-08 20:22 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-08-09 3:23 ` Rui Wang
2016-08-09 12:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-06-08 6:59 ` [PATCH V2 2/3] x86/ioapic: Fix wrong pointers in ioapic_setup_resources() Rui Wang
2016-06-10 9:45 ` [tip:x86/urgent] " tip-bot for Rui Wang
2016-06-10 12:01 ` [tip:x86/apic] x86/ioapic: Fix incorrect " tip-bot for Rui Wang
2016-06-10 12:48 ` [tip:x86/urgent] " tip-bot for Rui Wang
2016-06-08 6:59 ` [PATCH V2 3/3] x86/ioapic: Simplify ioapic_setup_resources() Rui Wang
2016-06-10 9:48 ` [tip:x86/apic] " tip-bot for Rui Wang
2016-06-10 12:54 ` tip-bot for Rui Wang
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=20160610164304.GJ19309@localhost \
--to=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=rui.y.wang@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).