Re: [PATCH v2] pci: fix unavailable irq number 255 reported by BIOS
From: Bjorn Helgaas
Date: Tue Jan 26 2016 - 19:25:17 EST
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 04:48:25PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jan 2016, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 09:26:29AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > The proper solution here is to flag that this device does not have an
> > > interrupt connected and act accordingly in the device driver, i.e. do not call
> > > request_irq() in the first place.
> > This is the crux of the problem. As far as I know, PCI doesn't have
> > a flag to indicate that dev->irq is a wire that's not connected, so
> > there's no generic way for a driver to know whether it should call
> > request_irq().
> > We could add one, of course, but that only helps in the drivers we
> > update. It'd be nice if we could figure out a way to fix this
> > without having to touch all the drivers.
> > I think any driver that uses line-based interrupts can potentially
> > fail if the platform uses Interrupt Line == 255 to indicate that the
> > line is not connected. If another driver happens to be using IRQ 255,
> > request_irq() may fail as it does here. Otherwise, I suspect
> > request_irq() will return success, but the driver won't get any
> > interrupts.
> Right. So we could certainly do something like this INVALID_IRQ thingy, but
> that looks a bit weird. What would request_irq() return?
> If it returns success, then drivers might make the wrong decision. If it
> returns an error code, then the i801 one works, but we might have to fix
> others anyway.
I was thinking request_irq() could return -EINVAL if the caller passed
INVALID_IRQ. That should tell drivers that this interrupt won't work.
We'd be making request_irq() return -EINVAL in some cases where it
currently returns success. But even though it returns success today,
I don't think the driver is getting interrupts, because the wire isn't
> I think it's better to have a software flag in pci_dev to indicate that there
> is no irq line and fix up the (probably few) affected drivers so they avoid
> calling request_irq() and take the right action.
We could add an "irq_valid" flag in struct pci_dev and make a new
rule that drivers should check dev->irq_valid before using dev->irq.
But realistically, i801 is the only place that will check irq_valid
because that's the only driver where we know about a problem, so that
seems like sort of a point solution.