From patchwork Thu Sep 29 22:39:48 2016 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Sinan Kaya X-Patchwork-Id: 676803 Return-Path: X-Original-To: incoming@patchwork.ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@bilbo.ozlabs.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3slTzK16ddz9sRZ for ; Fri, 30 Sep 2016 08:39:57 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=codeaurora.org header.i=@codeaurora.org header.b=FpdmlzfM; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=codeaurora.org header.i=@codeaurora.org header.b=QZq2Zox/; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934970AbcI2Wjy (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Sep 2016 18:39:54 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:48476 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934815AbcI2Wjw (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Sep 2016 18:39:52 -0400 Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id DDD6961B29; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 22:39:51 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1475188791; bh=E1hK2IAEgd3P45lxpikrGavWmnOGPTUQ6eB8L2hlfOs=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=FpdmlzfMATNIEu23CAEjq8rerdZnmnMWhqx8E4ViMVpprSTV8GGIypgJUiBlV1dF5 5uJHMk2qICQMWdfpwstDWXJd7YeTgQoNx1pjoOWXnrNRB9wx8UNCnL68jmrrUtChW7 59tzD/OSTrrKlSnk8uWVel2uLx+Eqlrsmqrs0yWI= X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=2.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,SPF_PASS,T_DKIM_INVALID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from [10.228.68.92] (global_nat1_iad_fw.qualcomm.com [129.46.232.65]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: okaya@smtp.codeaurora.org) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ECD0961B1E; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 22:39:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1475188790; bh=E1hK2IAEgd3P45lxpikrGavWmnOGPTUQ6eB8L2hlfOs=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=QZq2Zox/hbDMh5WIsekv6YMy4ZNgllHsphn8GiYWuMxw9c0pGli1ikyGGvziDU6+d PI6wnY5CsCqE66lBosQVQdmYTelndN2fPNvVUMC++q8p9CdPsmaGv1V/4wX+eP46vZ iOmhXGNTbh8iQJuEidPIJz/eqJd2seJLUSU2T9Nw= DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.1 smtp.codeaurora.org ECD0961B1E Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=okaya@codeaurora.org Subject: Re: 4.7 regression: ACPI: No IRQ available for PCI Interrupt Link [LNKD]. Try pci=noacpi or acpi=off To: Ondrej Zary References: <201609251512.05657.linux@rainbow-software.org> <201609291848.33803.linux@rainbow-software.org> <701eeb2f-bfc2-d541-4f6f-34be200ea44a@codeaurora.org> <201609292000.56943.linux@rainbow-software.org> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas , wim@djo.tudelft.nl, ravikanth.nalla@hpe.com From: Sinan Kaya Message-ID: <34355440-197d-44c7-b27d-535267d1161c@codeaurora.org> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 18:39:48 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <201609292000.56943.linux@rainbow-software.org> Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org On 9/29/2016 2:00 PM, Ondrej Zary wrote: >> The previous two patches were in the right direction. >> > >> > Can we also get the same output from 4.6 kernel with the attached patch for >> > the same machine you sent these? > Here it is. > >> > Something about SCI still doesn't feel right. >> > >> > The IRQ assignment fails if the penalty is greater than >> > PIRQ_PENALTY_ISA_ALWAYS. This will happen if BIOS tells us to use an IRQ >> > and same IRQ is in use by the SCI. Thanks, I reverted penalize_sci function and dropped patch #1. Can you try this again? Tested-by: Ondrej Zary diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c index c983bf7..a212709 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c @@ -619,6 +619,10 @@ static int acpi_pci_link_allocate(struct acpi_pci_link *link) acpi_device_bid(link->device)); return -ENODEV; } else { + if (link->irq.active < ACPI_MAX_ISA_IRQS) + acpi_isa_irq_penalty[link->irq.active] += + PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING; + printk(KERN_WARNING PREFIX "%s [%s] enabled at IRQ %d\n", acpi_device_name(link->device), acpi_device_bid(link->device), link->irq.active);