Re: [PATCH 3/3] PCI: Xilinx NWL PCIe: Fix Error for multi function device for legacy interrupts.

From: Marc Zyngier
Date: Wed Aug 31 2016 - 06:58:28 EST


On 31/08/16 10:56, Bharat Kumar Gogada wrote:
> > On 30/08/16 15:13, Bharat Kumar Gogada wrote:
>>>> Hi Bharat,
>>>>> @@ -561,7 +561,7 @@ static int nwl_pcie_init_irq_domain(struct
>>>>> nwl_pcie
>>>> *pcie)
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> pcie->legacy_irq_domain = irq_domain_add_linear(legacy_intc_node,
>>>>> - INTX_NUM,
>>>>> + INTX_NUM + 1,
>>>>> &legacy_domain_ops,
>>>>> pcie);
>>>>
>>>> This feels like the wrong thing to do. You have INTX_NUM irqs, so the
>>>> domain allocation should reflect this. On the other hand, the way the
>>>> driver currently deals with mappings is quite broken (consistently adding 1 to
>> the HW interrupt).
>>>>
>>> Hi Marc,
>>>
>>> Without above change I get following crash in kernel while booting.
>>>
>>> [ 2.441684] error: hwirq 0x4 is too large for dummy
>>>
>>> [ 2.441694] ------------[ cut here ]------------
>>>
>>> [ 2.441698] WARNING: at kernel/irq/irqdomain.c:344
>>>
>>> [ 2.441702] Modules linked in:
>>>
>>> [ 2.441706]
>>>
>>> [ 2.441714] CPU: 1 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 4.4.0 #8
>>>
>>> [ 2.441718] Hardware name: xlnx,zynqmp (DT)
>>>
>>> [ 2.441723] task: ffffffc071886b80 ti: ffffffc071888000 task.ti:
>> ffffffc071888000
>>>
>>> [ 2.441732] PC is at irq_domain_associate+0x138/0x1c0
>>>
>>> [ 2.441738] LR is at irq_domain_associate+0x138/0x1c0
>>>
>>> In kernel/irq/irqdomain.c function irq_domain_associate
>>>
>>> if (WARN(hwirq >= domain->hwirq_max,
>>> "error: hwirq 0x%x is too large for %s\n", (int)hwirq, domain->name))
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>>
>>> Here the hwirq and hwirq_max are equal to 4 without the above condition
>> (INTX_NUM + 1) due to which crash is coming.
>>> This is happening as the legacy interrupts are starting from 1 (INTA).
>>
>> I understood that. I'm still persisting in saying that you have the wrong fix.
>>
>> Your domain should always allocate many interrupts as you have interrupt
>> sources. These interrupts (hwirq) should be numbered from 0 to (n-1).
>
> Agreed, but here comes the problem the hwirq for legacy interrupts
> will start at 0x1 to 0x4 (INTA to INTD) and these values are as per
> PCIe specification for legacy interrupts. So these cannot be numbered
> from 0. So when 0x4 (INTD) for a multi-function device comes the
> crash occurs.

So who provides this hwirq? Who calls irq_domain_associate() with hwirq
set to 4?

>>
>>> And I'm consistently adding 1 to the HW interrupt as in
>>> nwl_pcie_leg_handler I get 0th bit set from MSGF_LEG_STATUS if INTA
>>> interrupt is raised but my hwirq number being mapped for INTA is 0x1
>>> so that's I'm adding 1 to obtain correct virtual irq. Same case in
>>> nwl_pcie_free_irq_domain since hwirq starts from one I'm adding 1 to
>>> obtain virtual irq and free it.
>>
>> I can see that. Nonetheless, this is wrong. Can you please test the patch I
>> provided in my reply and report what happens?
>
> Can you be more specific on what is the wrong, I'm adding one since
> the hwirq starts from 0x1 as mentioned above.

hwirq should always be the value that is reported by the HW. In your
case, this ranges from 0 to 3, never 4. So if we can understand why you
get called with 4 as a hwirq, we can fix this properly, for everyone. It
is also worth noting that other drivers do not have to do this +1 dance.

> I did try your suggestion with Ethernet card, but kernel hangs (it
> does not show any crash also, just hangs) when I do interface up
> (without bit + 1, using only bit position in handler). This is not
> working because in the legacy domain virq mapping starts with hwirq
> 0x1, there is no mapping for 0x0 in the domain, so EP interrupt is
> not serviced since virq being returned is zero.

Right. So let's go back to first principles and find out *who* decides
about the hwirq starting at 1 instead of zero.

Thanks,

M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...