We do not want to store the SCI penalty in the acpi_isa_irq_penalty[]
table because acpi_isa_irq_penalty[] only holds ISA IRQ penalties and
there's no guarantee that the SCI is an ISA IRQ. We add in the SCI
penalty as a special case in acpi_irq_get_penalty().
But if we called acpi_penalize_isa_irq() or acpi_irq_penalty_update()
for an SCI that happened to be an ISA IRQ, they stored the SCI
penalty (part of the acpi_irq_get_penalty() return value) in
acpi_isa_irq_penalty[]. Subsequent calls to acpi_irq_get_penalty()
returned a penalty that included *two* SCI penalties.
Fixes:
103544d86976 (ACPI,PCI,IRQ: reduce resource requirements)
Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>
Acked-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Tested-by: Jonathan Liu <net147@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
continue;
if (used)
- new_penalty = acpi_irq_get_penalty(irq) +
+ new_penalty = acpi_isa_irq_penalty[irq] +
PIRQ_PENALTY_ISA_USED;
else
new_penalty = 0;
void acpi_penalize_isa_irq(int irq, int active)
{
if ((irq >= 0) && (irq < ARRAY_SIZE(acpi_isa_irq_penalty)))
- acpi_isa_irq_penalty[irq] = acpi_irq_get_penalty(irq) +
+ acpi_isa_irq_penalty[irq] +=
(active ? PIRQ_PENALTY_ISA_USED : PIRQ_PENALTY_PCI_USING);
}