Re: [PATCH v6 4/5] MIPS: Octeon: Setup irq_domains for interrupts.

[David Daney]

On 03/02/2012 06:22 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
[...]
> > diff --git a/arch/mips/Kconfig b/arch/mips/Kconfig
> > index ce30e2f..01344ae 100644
> > --- a/arch/mips/Kconfig
> > +++ b/arch/mips/Kconfig
> > @@ -1432,6 +1432,7 @@ config CPU_CAVIUM_OCTEON
> >   	select WEAK_ORDERING
> >   	select CPU_SUPPORTS_HIGHMEM
> >   	select CPU_SUPPORTS_HUGEPAGES
> > +	select IRQ_DOMAIN
>
> IIRC, Grant has a patch cued up that enables IRQ_DOMAIN for all of MIPS.

Indeed, I now see it in linux-next.  I will remove this one.

> >   	help
> >   	  The Cavium Octeon processor is a highly integrated chip containing
> >   	  many ethernet hardware widgets for networking tasks. The processor
> > diff --git a/arch/mips/cavium-octeon/octeon-irq.c b/arch/mips/cavium-octeon/octeon-irq.c
> > index bdcedd3..e9f2f6c 100644
> > --- a/arch/mips/cavium-octeon/octeon-irq.c
> > +++ b/arch/mips/cavium-octeon/octeon-irq.c
[...]
> > +static void __init octeon_irq_set_ciu_mapping(unsigned int irq,
> > +					      unsigned int line,
> > +					      unsigned int bit,
> > +					      struct irq_domain *domain,
> >   					      struct irq_chip *chip,
> >   					      irq_flow_handler_t handler)
> >   {
> > +	struct irq_data *irqd;
> >   	union octeon_ciu_chip_data cd;
> >
> >   	irq_set_chip_and_handler(irq, chip, handler);
> > -
> >   	cd.l = 0;
> >   	cd.s.line = line;
> >   	cd.s.bit = bit;
> >
> >   	irq_set_chip_data(irq, cd.p);
> >   	octeon_irq_ciu_to_irq[line][bit] = irq;
> > +
> > +	irqd = irq_get_irq_data(irq);
> > +	irqd->hwirq = line<<  6 | bit;
> > +	irqd->domain = domain;
>
> I think the domain code will set these.

It is my understanding that the domain code only does this for:

o irq_domain_add_legacy()

o irq_create_direct_mapping()

o irq_create_mapping()

We use none of those.  So I do it here.

If there is a better way, I am open to suggestions.

[...]
> > @@ -982,6 +1092,10 @@ static void __init octeon_irq_init_ciu(void)
> >   	struct irq_chip *chip_mbox;
> >   	struct irq_chip *chip_wd;
> >   	struct irq_chip *chip_gpio;
> > +	struct device_node *gpio_node;
> > +	struct device_node *ciu_node;
> > +	struct irq_domain *gpio_domain;
> > +	struct irq_domain *ciu_domain;
> >
> >   	octeon_irq_init_ciu_percpu();
> >   	octeon_irq_setup_secondary = octeon_irq_setup_secondary_ciu;
> > @@ -1011,83 +1125,144 @@ static void __init octeon_irq_init_ciu(void)
> >   	/* Mips internal */
> >   	octeon_irq_init_core();
> >
> > +	gpio_node = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, "cavium,octeon-3860-gpio");
> > +	ciu_node = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, "cavium,octeon-3860-ciu");
> > +	/* gpio domain host_data is the base hwirq number. */
> > +	gpio_domain = irq_domain_add_linear(gpio_node, 16,&octeon_irq_domain_gpio_ops, (void *)16);
>
> It would be better to define a struct here rather than casting a data
> value to a ptr.

You mean allocate storage for the data somewhere and then pass a pointer 
to it?

If so, I could, but it would just be adding code and data size just to 
satisfy some coding style thing...

Or do you want a union of the pointer and my int?  That would use the 
same amount of storage, but add more source code to gain what?

[...]
> > +	octeon_irq_set_ciu_mapping(OCTEON_IRQ_PEM0, 1, 48,
> > +				   ciu_domain, chip, handle_level_irq);
> > +	octeon_irq_set_ciu_mapping(OCTEON_IRQ_PEM1, 1, 49,
> > +				   ciu_domain, chip, handle_level_irq);
> > +	octeon_irq_set_ciu_mapping(OCTEON_IRQ_SRIO0, 1, 50,
> > +				   ciu_domain, chip, handle_level_irq);
> > +	octeon_irq_set_ciu_mapping(OCTEON_IRQ_SRIO1, 1, 51,
> > +				   ciu_domain, chip, handle_level_irq);
> > +	octeon_irq_set_ciu_mapping(OCTEON_IRQ_LMC0, 1, 52,
> > +				   ciu_domain, chip, handle_level_irq);
> > +	octeon_irq_set_ciu_mapping(OCTEON_IRQ_DFM, 1, 56,
> > +				   ciu_domain, chip, handle_level_irq);
> > +	octeon_irq_set_ciu_mapping(OCTEON_IRQ_RST, 1, 63,
> > +				   ciu_domain, chip, handle_level_irq);
>
> Can all these calls be moved into the .map function somehow?

No, the non-OF code using the OCTEON_IRQ_* symbols doesn't use 
irq_domain, so the .map function would never be used.


> edge vs. level should be driven by dts.

We may have to disagree on this point.  Because:

1) edge vs. level can be accurately probed, as we do here.

2) The dts doesnt contain the information.


David Daney
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/