Re: [PATCH] x86/acpi: Fix improper handling of SCI INT for platforms supporting only IOAPIC mode

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 6:30 PM, Sajjan, Vikas C
<vikas.cha.sajjan@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rjwysocki@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:rjwysocki@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rafael J. Wysocki
> Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2017 10:51 PM
> To: Sajjan, Vikas C <vikas.cha.sajjan@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Linux PM <linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Seunghun Han <kkamagui@xxxxxxxxx>; Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>; Lakshminarasimha, Sunil Vishwanathpur <sunil.vl@xxxxxxx>; Attar, Abdul Lateef <abdul-lateef.attar@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/acpi: Fix improper handling of SCI INT for platforms supporting only IOAPIC mode
>
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 10:38 AM, Vikas C Sajjan <vikas.cha.sajjan@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> The platforms which support only IOAPIC mode and whose SCI INT is
>> greater than 16, passes SCI INT via FADT and not via MADT int src
>> override structure. In such cases current logic fails to handle it and
>> throws error "Invalid bus_irq %u for legacy override". This patch
>> handles the above  mentioned case. While at it, also modify function
>> mp_override_legacy_irq() to use the newly introduced function mp_register_ioapic_irq().
>
> Actually, is it necessary to make this extra change here?
>
> How complicated would it be to separate it out?
>
> I can move these extra changes into a separate patch and keep only the fix in this patch.

That would be useful I think in case someone wants to backport your
fix, for example.

Thanks,
Rafael