On 10/29/2015 11:53 AM, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
On 29.10.2015 16:01, Sinan Kaya wrote:
On 10/29/2015 7:38 AM, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
On 28.10.2015 21:36, Sinan Kaya wrote:
- ACPI code is unable to discover the interrupt numbers when objects
are ordered as follows in the ACPI file
PNP0A08 object PNP0C0F INTA object PNP0C0F INTB object PNP0C0F INTC object PNP0C0F INTD object
This gives me invalid link context error.
pci 0000:00:00.0: PCI INT A: no GSI pci 0000:01:00.0: Derived GSI for 0000:01:00.0 INT A from 0000:00:00.0 acpi PNP0C0F:00: Invalid link context
If I order it like this in the ACPI file,
PNP0C0F INTA object PNP0C0F INTB object PNP0C0F INTC object PNP0C0F INTD object PNP0A08 object
then, the legacy interrupt numbers can be discovered properly.
Can you show full content of your PNP0C0F and PNP0A08 objects?
ACPI table is considered proprietary. I don't think I can get the legal approval in time. I can give you pieces though.
Here is the _PRT Device (PCI0) { // PCIe port 0 Name(_HID, EISAID("PNP0A08")) // PCI express Name(_CID, EISAID("PNP0A03")) // Compatible PCI Root Bridge { .... Name(_PRT, Package(){ Package(){0x0FFFF, 0, _SB.LN0A, 0}, // Slot 0, INTA Package(){0x0FFFF, 1, _SB.LN0B, 0}, // Slot 0, INTB Package(){0x0FFFF, 2, _SB.LN0C, 0}, // Slot 0, INTC Package(){0x0FFFF, 3, _SB.LN0D, 0} // Slot 0, INTD }) }
Here is the PNP0C0F
Device(LN0A){ Name(_HID, EISAID("PNP0C0F")) // PCI interrupt link Name(_UID, 1) Name(_PRS, ResourceTemplate(){ Interrupt(ResourceProducer, Level, ActiveHigh, Exclusive, , ,) {0xE8} }) Method(_DIS) {} Method(_CRS) { Return (_PRS) } Method(_SRS, 1) {} }
Can you please apply patch below:
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c index fec1c91..fe34415 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c @@ -48,10 +48,19 @@ resource_size_t pcibios_align_resource(void *data, const struct resource *res, */ int pcibios_enable_device(struct pci_dev *dev, int mask) {
int ret;if (pci_has_flag(PCI_PROBE_ONLY)) return 0;
return pci_enable_resources(dev, mask);
ret = pci_enable_resources(dev, mask);if (ret < 0)return ret;+#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
if (!dev->msi_enabled)return acpi_pci_irq_enable(dev);+#endif
return 0;}
/*
@@ -61,10 +70,6 @@ int pcibios_add_device(struct pci_dev *dev) { if (acpi_disabled) dev->irq = of_irq_parse_and_map_pci(dev, 0, 0); -#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
elseacpi_pci_irq_enable(dev);-#endif
return 0;}
and let me know if the order still matter?
Regards, Tomasz -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Thanks, This seems to have fixed the ACPI table order problem.