| Message ID | 1353505564.24807.12.camel@joe-AO722 (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Wednesday, November 21, 2012 05:46:04 AM Joe Perches wrote: > On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 16:43 +0800, Daniel J Blueman wrote: > > Previously a new line is implicitly added in the no GSI case: > > > > [ 7.185182] pci 0001:00:12.0: can't derive routing for PCI INT A > > [ 7.191352] pci 0001:00:12.0: PCI INT A: no GSI > > [ 7.195956] - using ISA IRQ 10 > > > > The code thus prints a blank line where no legacy IRQ is available: > > > > [ 1.650124] pci 0000:00:14.0: can't derive routing for PCI INT A > > [ 1.650126] pci 0000:00:14.0: PCI INT A: no GSI > > [ 1.650126] > > [ 1.650180] pci 0000:00:14.0: can't derive routing for PCI INT A > > > > Fix this by making the newline explicit and removing the superfluous > > one. > > This breaks the logging code below it when there is an ISA irq. > > The below works, but is a workaround for a defect in the printk > subsystem introduced by a logging change that will be fixed in > a near future release. What exactly do you mean by "near future"? Rafael > Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> > --- > drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c | 10 +++++----- > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c > index f288e00..68a921d 100644 > --- a/drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c > @@ -458,19 +458,19 @@ int acpi_pci_irq_enable(struct pci_dev *dev) > */ > if (gsi < 0) { > u32 dev_gsi; > - dev_warn(&dev->dev, "PCI INT %c: no GSI", pin_name(pin)); > /* Interrupt Line values above 0xF are forbidden */ > if (dev->irq > 0 && (dev->irq <= 0xF) && > (acpi_isa_irq_to_gsi(dev->irq, &dev_gsi) == 0)) { > - printk(" - using ISA IRQ %d\n", dev->irq); > + dev_warn(&dev->dev, "PCI INT %c: no GSI - using ISA IRQ %d\n", > + pin_name(pin), dev->irq); > acpi_register_gsi(&dev->dev, dev_gsi, > ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE, > ACPI_ACTIVE_LOW); > - return 0; > } else { > - printk("\n"); > - return 0; > + dev_warn(&dev->dev, "PCI INT %c: no GSI\n", > + pin_name(pin)); > } > + return 0; > } > > rc = acpi_register_gsi(&dev->dev, gsi, triggering, polarity); > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >
On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 21:50 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wednesday, November 21, 2012 05:46:04 AM Joe Perches wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 16:43 +0800, Daniel J Blueman wrote: > > > Previously a new line is implicitly added in the no GSI case: > > > > > > [ 7.185182] pci 0001:00:12.0: can't derive routing for PCI INT A > > > [ 7.191352] pci 0001:00:12.0: PCI INT A: no GSI > > > [ 7.195956] - using ISA IRQ 10 > > > > > > The code thus prints a blank line where no legacy IRQ is available: > > > > > > [ 1.650124] pci 0000:00:14.0: can't derive routing for PCI INT A > > > [ 1.650126] pci 0000:00:14.0: PCI INT A: no GSI > > > [ 1.650126] > > > [ 1.650180] pci 0000:00:14.0: can't derive routing for PCI INT A > > > > > > Fix this by making the newline explicit and removing the superfluous > > > one. > > > > This breaks the logging code below it when there is an ISA irq. > > > > The below works, but is a workaround for a defect in the printk > > subsystem introduced by a logging change that will be fixed in > > a near future release. > > What exactly do you mean by "near future"? I mean Jan Schönherr's patches that should fix this are likely to be picked up one day. https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/13/678 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 22:25 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wednesday, November 21, 2012 12:53:55 PM Joe Perches wrote: > > I mean Jan Schönherr's patches that should fix this are > > likely to be picked up one day. > > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/13/678 > > Till then, we need the patch you sent, right? And it won't hurt to apply it > anyway? If it's a real problem for someone, I guess so. It shouldn't hurt anything. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wednesday, November 21, 2012 12:53:55 PM Joe Perches wrote: > On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 21:50 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Wednesday, November 21, 2012 05:46:04 AM Joe Perches wrote: > > > On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 16:43 +0800, Daniel J Blueman wrote: > > > > Previously a new line is implicitly added in the no GSI case: > > > > > > > > [ 7.185182] pci 0001:00:12.0: can't derive routing for PCI INT A > > > > [ 7.191352] pci 0001:00:12.0: PCI INT A: no GSI > > > > [ 7.195956] - using ISA IRQ 10 > > > > > > > > The code thus prints a blank line where no legacy IRQ is available: > > > > > > > > [ 1.650124] pci 0000:00:14.0: can't derive routing for PCI INT A > > > > [ 1.650126] pci 0000:00:14.0: PCI INT A: no GSI > > > > [ 1.650126] > > > > [ 1.650180] pci 0000:00:14.0: can't derive routing for PCI INT A > > > > > > > > Fix this by making the newline explicit and removing the superfluous > > > > one. > > > > > > This breaks the logging code below it when there is an ISA irq. > > > > > > The below works, but is a workaround for a defect in the printk > > > subsystem introduced by a logging change that will be fixed in > > > a near future release. > > > > What exactly do you mean by "near future"? > > I mean Jan Schönherr's patches that should fix this are > likely to be picked up one day. > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/13/678 Till then, we need the patch you sent, right? And it won't hurt to apply it anyway? Rafael
On Wednesday, November 21, 2012 01:24:59 PM Joe Perches wrote: > On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 22:25 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Wednesday, November 21, 2012 12:53:55 PM Joe Perches wrote: > > > I mean Jan Schönherr's patches that should fix this are > > > likely to be picked up one day. > > > > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/13/678 > > > > Till then, we need the patch you sent, right? And it won't hurt to apply it > > anyway? > > If it's a real problem for someone, I guess so. > It shouldn't hurt anything. So I've applied it. Thanks, Rafael
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c index f288e00..68a921d 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c @@ -458,19 +458,19 @@ int acpi_pci_irq_enable(struct pci_dev *dev) */ if (gsi < 0) { u32 dev_gsi; - dev_warn(&dev->dev, "PCI INT %c: no GSI", pin_name(pin)); /* Interrupt Line values above 0xF are forbidden */ if (dev->irq > 0 && (dev->irq <= 0xF) && (acpi_isa_irq_to_gsi(dev->irq, &dev_gsi) == 0)) { - printk(" - using ISA IRQ %d\n", dev->irq); + dev_warn(&dev->dev, "PCI INT %c: no GSI - using ISA IRQ %d\n", + pin_name(pin), dev->irq); acpi_register_gsi(&dev->dev, dev_gsi, ACPI_LEVEL_SENSITIVE, ACPI_ACTIVE_LOW); - return 0; } else { - printk("\n"); - return 0; + dev_warn(&dev->dev, "PCI INT %c: no GSI\n", + pin_name(pin)); } + return 0; } rc = acpi_register_gsi(&dev->dev, gsi, triggering, polarity);