From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@orcam.me.uk>
To: Nikolai Zhubr <zhubr.2@gmail.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] x86/PCI: SiS PIRQ router updates
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2021 01:09:45 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.2107030031550.33206@angie.orcam.me.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <60DF4C75.7020609@gmail.com>
Hello Nikolai,
> > Nikolai, can you please give it a hit with the extra debug patch as
> > requested in my other message?
>
> With
> linux-x86-pirq-router-sis85c503.diff applied
> linux-x86-pirq-router-sis85c497.diff applied
> and DEBUG 1 in arch/x86/include/asm/pci_x86.h
> here is new log:
>
> https://pastebin.com/n3udQgcq
>
> My feeling is that something went a bit wrong because:
>
> 8139too 0000:00:0d.0: can't route interrupt
More important is actually the previous line:
PCI: Attempting to find IRQ router for [0000:0000]
meaning that the PIRQ structure defined by the BIOS has not specified the
vendor:device ID pair for the router [1039:0496] which we match against.
I don't know where exactly the definition our `struct irq_routing_table'
corresponds to comes from (I'll appreciate pointers!); it has not been
given in the PCI BIOS 2.1 specification, only individual IRQ routing
entries have. It may well be that [0000:0000] is a legitimate blanket
entry requesting the OS to figure out itself which device is the hardware
router.
Anyway it is something we can handle in a reasonably staightforward
manner, so I'll spend some time to implement such wildcard matching. Most
importantly your system does have the router structure, so barring this
minor snag it can be handled properly without horrible hacks. We're very
close now.
> Note: I still used 4.14 kernel for this test but your patches applied cleanly
> with no fuzz so I suppose it should be ok.
Indeed, that does not matter. This code is very old, dating back to
1990s.
Maciej
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-02 23:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-23 23:38 [PATCH RFC 0/2] x86/PCI: SiS PIRQ router updates Maciej W. Rozycki
2021-06-23 23:38 ` [PATCH RFC 1/2] x86/PCI: Disambiguate SiS85C503 PIRQ router code entities Maciej W. Rozycki
2021-06-23 23:39 ` [PATCH RFC 2/2] x86/PCI: Add support for the SiS85C497 PIRQ router Maciej W. Rozycki
2021-07-02 17:27 ` [PATCH RFC 0/2] x86/PCI: SiS PIRQ router updates Nikolai Zhubr
2021-07-02 23:09 ` Maciej W. Rozycki [this message]
2021-07-05 10:54 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2021-07-08 20:49 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
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=alpine.DEB.2.21.2107030031550.33206@angie.orcam.me.uk \
--to=macro@orcam.me.uk \
--cc=arnd@kernel.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=zhubr.2@gmail.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).