On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 01:36:55PM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> acpi_irq_get_penalty is now calculating the penalty on the fly now.
> No need to maintain global list of penalties or calculate them
> at the init time. Removing duplicate code in acpi_irq_penalty_init.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <ok...@codeaurora.org>
> ---
>  arch/x86/pci/acpi.c         |  1 -
>  drivers/acpi/pci_link.c     | 36 ------------------------------------
>  include/acpi/acpi_drivers.h |  1 -
>  3 files changed, 38 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c b/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c
> index 3cd6983..b2a4e2a 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c
> @@ -396,7 +396,6 @@ int __init pci_acpi_init(void)
>               return -ENODEV;
>  
>       printk(KERN_INFO "PCI: Using ACPI for IRQ routing\n");
> -     acpi_irq_penalty_init();

Yay!  Another x86-ism and init ordering issue gone!  Thanks for doing
this!

>       pcibios_enable_irq = acpi_pci_irq_enable;
>       pcibios_disable_irq = acpi_pci_irq_disable;
>       x86_init.pci.init_irq = x86_init_noop;
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
> index 12ea784..ab39208 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
> @@ -520,42 +520,6 @@ static int acpi_irq_get_penalty(int irq)
>       return penalty;
>  }
>  
> -int __init acpi_irq_penalty_init(void)
> -{
> -     struct acpi_pci_link *link;
> -     int i;
> -
> -     /*
> -      * Update penalties to facilitate IRQ balancing.
> -      */
> -     list_for_each_entry(link, &acpi_link_list, list) {
> -
> -             /*
> -              * reflect the possible and active irqs in the penalty table --
> -              * useful for breaking ties.
> -              */
> -             if (link->irq.possible_count) {
> -                     int penalty =
> -                         PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_POSSIBLE /
> -                         link->irq.possible_count;
> -
> -                     for (i = 0; i < link->irq.possible_count; i++) {
> -                             if (link->irq.possible[i] < ACPI_MAX_ISA_IRQS)
> -                                     acpi_isa_irq_penalty[link->irq.
> -                                                      possible[i]] +=
> -                                         penalty;
> -                     }
> -
> -             } else if (link->irq.active &&
> -                             (link->irq.active < ACPI_MAX_ISA_IRQS)) {
> -                     acpi_isa_irq_penalty[link->irq.active] +=
> -                         PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_POSSIBLE;
> -             }
> -     }
> -
> -     return 0;
> -}
> -
>  static int acpi_irq_balance = -1;    /* 0: static, 1: balance */
>  
>  static int acpi_pci_link_allocate(struct acpi_pci_link *link)
> diff --git a/include/acpi/acpi_drivers.h b/include/acpi/acpi_drivers.h
> index 29c6912..797ae2e 100644
> --- a/include/acpi/acpi_drivers.h
> +++ b/include/acpi/acpi_drivers.h
> @@ -78,7 +78,6 @@
>  
>  /* ACPI PCI Interrupt Link (pci_link.c) */
>  
> -int acpi_irq_penalty_init(void);
>  int acpi_pci_link_allocate_irq(acpi_handle handle, int index, int 
> *triggering,
>                              int *polarity, char **name);
>  int acpi_pci_link_free_irq(acpi_handle handle);
> -- 
> 1.8.2.1
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
> the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to