Re: [PATCH v4 0/5] PCI: rcar-gen4: irqchip/gic-v3: Handle GIC ITS

[Manivannan Sadhasivam]

On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 01:43:26PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Jul 2026 13:33:22 +0100,
> Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > On 7/9/26 2:19 PM, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 07, 2026 at 10:35:38PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > >> Configure all R-Car Gen4 PCIe controller MSI registers fully, both in
> > >> case MSI are enabled and disabled.
> > >> 
> > >> Patch GIC ITS driver and add quirks for R-Car Gen4 GIC ITS, which is
> > >> configured to 32-bit address width for AXI or APB interface.
> > >> 
> > >> Switch R-Car V4H to use GIC ITS in its DT and describe the GIC ITS
> > >> implementation cacheable and shareable limitations.
> > >> 
> > >> Marek Vasut (5):
> > >>    PCI: dwc: Determine whether iMSI is used before calling .init
> > >>    PCI: rcar-gen4: Configure AXIINTC if iMSI-RX not used
> > >>    irqchip/gic-v3: Refactor GIC600 limited to 32bit PA erratum handling
> > >>    irqchip/gic-v3: Add Renesas R-Car Gen4 erratum workaround
> > > 
> > > Is there a functional dependency between irqchip and PCI patches? Since the
> > > irqchip patches touch ARM64 Kconfig etc... I'm wondering if it still need to go
> > > through PCI tree.
> > I do not believe there is.
> > 
> > These two configure the PCIe controller hardware:
> >   PCI: dwc: Determine whether iMSI is used before calling .init
> >   PCI: rcar-gen4: Configure AXIINTC if iMSI-RX not used
> > 
> > These two fill in GIC ITS quirks:
> >   irqchip/gic-v3: Refactor GIC600 limited to 32bit PA erratum handling
> >   irqchip/gic-v3: Add Renesas R-Car Gen4 erratum workaround
> > 
> > This one does yes depend on the two and two patches above, and can
> > only be applied once all four aforementioned patches land, otherwise
> > things really yes will break:
> >   arm64: dts: renesas: r8a779g0: Add GICv3 ITS and update PCIe nodes
> > 
> > Would you like me to split the series up , or can you and Marc (?)
> > pick the relevant parts via matching trees ?
> 
> I don't think there's anything for me to pick. The whole thing looks
> like a consistent set, and it probably should be kept together.
> 
> Given that the irqchip stuff has been acked by the relevant party, and
> that the last patch will cause havoc if taken on its own, the only
> course of action is to route the whole thing together, the PCI tree
> being the most obvious victim.

Alright then. I'll merge all 4 patches to PCI tree.

- Mani

-- 
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்