[lkml]   [2015]   [Mar]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] x86: Bypass legacy PIC and PIT on ACPI hardware reduced platform
On 2015/3/5 19:36, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Li, Aubrey <> wrote:
>> On 2015/3/5 4:11, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>> * Arjan van de Ven <> wrote:
>>>> On 3/4/2015 1:50 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 12:43:08AM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>>>>>>> Using 'acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware' flag outside the ACPI code
>>>>>>> is a mistake.
>>>>>> ideally, the presence of that flag in the firmware table will clear/set more global settings,
>>>>>> for example, having that flag should cause the 8042 input code to not probe for the 8042.
>>>>>> for interrupts, there really ought to be a "apic first/only" mode, which is then used on
>>>>>> all modern systems (not just hw reduced).
>>>>> Do we need some sort of platform-specific querying interfaces now too,
>>>>> similar to cpu_has()? I.e., platform_has()...
>>>>> if (platform_has(X86_PLATFORM_REDUCED_HW))
>>>>> do stuff..
>>>> more like
>>>> platform_has(X86_PLATFORM_PIT)
>>>> etc, one for each legacy io item
>>> Precisely. The main problem is the generic, 'lumps everything
>>> together' nature of the acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware flag.
>>> (Like the big kernel lock lumped together all sorts of locking rules
>>> and semantics.)
>>> Properly split out, feature-ish or driver-ish interfaces for PIT and
>>> other legacy details are the proper approach to 'turn them off'.
>>> - x86_platform is a function pointer driven, driver-ish interface.
>>> - platform_has(X86_PLATFORM_IT) is a flag driven, feature-flag-ish
>>> interface.
>>> Both are fine - for something as separate as the PIT (or the PIC)
>>> it might make more sense to go towards a 'driver' interface
>>> though, as modern drivers are (and will be) much different from
>>> the legacy PIT.
>>> Whichever method is used, low level platforms can just switch them
>>> on/off in their enumeration/detection routines, while the generic
>>> code will have them enabled by default.
>> Whichever method is used, we will face a problem how to determine
>> PIT exists or not.
>> When we enabled Bay Trail-T platform at the beginning, we were
>> trying to make the code as generic as possible, and it works
>> properly up to now. So we don't have a SUBARCH like
>> X86_SUBARCH_INTEL_MID to use the platform specific functions. And
>> for now I'm not quite sure it's a good idea to create one.
>> If we make it as a flag driven, I don't know there is a flag in
>> firmware better than ACPI HW reduced flag(Of course it's not good
>> enough to cover all the cases). Or if we want to use platform info
>> to turn on/off this flag, we'll have to maintain a platform list,
>> which may be longer and more complicated than worth doing that.
> Well, it's not nearly so difficult, because you already have a
> platform flag: acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware.
> What I object against is to infest generic codepaths with unreadable,
> unrobust crap like:
> + if (acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware) {
> + pr_info("Using NULL legacy PIC\n");
> + legacy_pic = &null_legacy_pic;
> + } else
> + legacy_pic->init(0);
> To solve that, add a small (early) init function (say
> 'x86_reduced_hw_init()') that sets up the right driver
> selections if acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware is set:
> - in x86_reduced_hw_init() set 'legacy_pic' to 'null_legacy_pic'
> - clean up 'global_clock_event' handling: instead of a global
> variable, move its management into x86_platform_ops::get_clockevent()
> and set the method to hpet/pit/abp/etc. specific handlers that
> return the right clockevent device.
> - in your x86_reduced_hw_init() function add the hpet clockevent
> device to x86_platform_ops::get_clockevent, overriding the default
> PIT.

> - in x86_reduced_hw_init() set pm_power_off.
> - set 'reboot_type' and remove the acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware hack
> from efi_reboot_required().
I'll do more investigation above items but I want to leave at least
these two as the quirk today unless I am convinced I can do that because
from my understanding, UEFI runtime services should not be supported in
reduced hw mode.

> etc.
> Just keep the generic init codepaths free of those random selections
> based on global flags, okay?


> Thanks,
> Ingo

 \ /
  Last update: 2015-03-05 14:01    [W:0.072 / U:0.092 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site