[v3,2/5] ACPI: Make acpi_dev_irqresource_disabled() public

To allow the platform device to "put" an irq, make the function to reset
an ACPI companion device irq resource public.

Signed-off-by: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>

---
 drivers/acpi/resource.c | 2 +-
 include/linux/acpi.h    | 5 +++++
 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

-- 
2.26.2

On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 6:25 PM John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> To allow the platform device to "put" an irq, make the function to reset
> an ACPI companion device irq resource public.
>
> Signed-off-by: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>

I'd rather move it to kernel/resource.c as it is not ACPI-specific and
its only connection to ACPI is that it is used in the ACPI resources
management code.

> ---
>  drivers/acpi/resource.c | 2 +-
>  include/linux/acpi.h    | 5 +++++
>  2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/resource.c b/drivers/acpi/resource.c
> index ad04824ca3ba..0999a98cab3c 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/resource.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/resource.c
> @@ -380,7 +380,7 @@ unsigned int acpi_dev_get_irq_type(int triggering, int polarity)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_dev_get_irq_type);
>
> -static void acpi_dev_irqresource_disabled(struct resource *res, u32 gsi)
> +void acpi_dev_irqresource_disabled(struct resource *res, u32 gsi)
>  {
>         res->start = gsi;
>         res->end = gsi;
> diff --git a/include/linux/acpi.h b/include/linux/acpi.h
> index 39263c6b52e1..d5101e36a645 100644
> --- a/include/linux/acpi.h
> +++ b/include/linux/acpi.h
> @@ -467,6 +467,7 @@ bool acpi_dev_resource_ext_address_space(struct acpi_resource *ares,
>                                          struct resource_win *win);
>  unsigned long acpi_dev_irq_flags(u8 triggering, u8 polarity, u8 shareable);
>  unsigned int acpi_dev_get_irq_type(int triggering, int polarity);
> +void acpi_dev_irqresource_disabled(struct resource *res, u32 gsi);
>  bool acpi_dev_resource_interrupt(struct acpi_resource *ares, int index,
>                                  struct resource *res);
>
> @@ -939,6 +940,10 @@ static inline struct acpi_device *acpi_resource_consumer(struct resource *res)
>         return NULL;
>  }
>
> +static inline void acpi_dev_irqresource_disabled(struct resource *res, u32 gsi)
> +{
> +}
> +
>  #endif /* !CONFIG_ACPI */
>
>  #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_HOTPLUG_IOAPIC
> --
> 2.26.2
>

On 25/11/2020 17:43, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 6:25 PM John Garry<john.garry@huawei.com>  wrote:

>> To allow the platform device to "put" an irq, make the function to reset

>> an ACPI companion device irq resource public.

>>

>> Signed-off-by: John Garry<john.garry@huawei.com>

> I'd rather move it to kernel/resource.c as it is not ACPI-specific and

> its only connection to ACPI is that it is used in the ACPI resources

> management code.

> 


Hi Rafael,

That's ok, but we could also just put in include/linux/ioport.h as a 
static inline as it’s so small. Not so important, I guess.

And I'm not sure how this part could be merged, so maybe I can do as 2x 
patches now - 1. add resource.c function 2. remove ACPI duplicate. - so 
we have the option to merge ACPI part later if it makes things easier.

Thanks,
John

On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 9:49 AM John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> On 25/11/2020 17:43, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 6:25 PM John Garry<john.garry@huawei.com>  wrote:
> >> To allow the platform device to "put" an irq, make the function to reset
> >> an ACPI companion device irq resource public.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: John Garry<john.garry@huawei.com>
> > I'd rather move it to kernel/resource.c as it is not ACPI-specific and
> > its only connection to ACPI is that it is used in the ACPI resources
> > management code.
> >
>
> Hi Rafael,
>
> That's ok, but we could also just put in include/linux/ioport.h as a
> static inline as it’s so small. Not so important, I guess.
>
> And I'm not sure how this part could be merged, so maybe I can do as 2x
> patches now - 1. add resource.c function 2. remove ACPI duplicate. - so
> we have the option to merge ACPI part later if it makes things easier.

That would work too.

My point really was that exporting that function from ACPI was rather confusing.