Re: [PATCH v11 1/2] irqchip: gicv2m: Add support for ARM GICv2m MSI(-X) doorbell
From: Mark Rutland
Date: Wed Nov 26 2014 - 06:12:03 EST
Hi Marc,
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 06:47:22PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> From: Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@xxxxxxx>
>
> ARM GICv2m specification extends GICv2 to support MSI(-X) with
> a new register frame. This allows a GICv2 based system to support
> MSI with minimal changes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@xxxxxxx>
> [maz: converted the driver to use stacked irq domains,
> updated changelog]
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/arm64/Kconfig | 1 +
> drivers/irqchip/Kconfig | 6 +
> drivers/irqchip/Makefile | 1 +
> drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v2m.c | 333 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c | 4 +
> include/linux/irqchip/arm-gic.h | 2 +
> 6 files changed, 347 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v2m.c
[...]
> +static int gicv2m_irq_domain_alloc(struct irq_domain *domain, unsigned int virq,
> + unsigned int nr_irqs, void *args)
> +{
> + struct v2m_data *v2m = domain->host_data;
> + int hwirq, offset, err = 0;
> +
> + spin_lock(&v2m->msi_cnt_lock);
> + offset = find_first_zero_bit(v2m->bm, v2m->nr_spis);
> + if (offset < v2m->nr_spis)
> + __set_bit(offset, v2m->bm);
> + else
> + err = -ENOSPC;
> + spin_unlock(&v2m->msi_cnt_lock);
> +
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> +
> + hwirq = v2m->spi_start + offset;
> +
> + err = gicv2m_irq_gic_domain_alloc(domain, virq, hwirq);
> + if (err) {
> + gicv2m_unalloc_msi(v2m, hwirq);
> + return err;
> + }
> +
> + irq_domain_set_hwirq_and_chip(domain, virq, hwirq,
> + &gicv2m_irq_chip, v2m);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void gicv2m_irq_domain_free(struct irq_domain *domain,
> + unsigned int virq, unsigned int nr_irqs)
> +{
> + struct irq_data *d = irq_domain_get_irq_data(domain, virq);
> + struct v2m_data *v2m = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> +
> + BUG_ON(nr_irqs != 1);
We didn't check nr_irqs at all in gicv2m_irq_domain_alloc, which seems a
bit odd given this BUG_ON.
Is the caller responsible for checking we only allocated one irq, or is
it only valid to ask for one?
> + gicv2m_unalloc_msi(v2m, d->hwirq);
> + irq_domain_free_irqs_parent(domain, virq, nr_irqs);
> +}
> +
> +static const struct irq_domain_ops gicv2m_domain_ops = {
> + .alloc = gicv2m_irq_domain_alloc,
> + .free = gicv2m_irq_domain_free,
> +};
> +
> +static bool is_msi_spi_valid(u32 base, u32 num)
> +{
> + if (base < V2M_MIN_SPI) {
> + pr_err("Invalid MSI base SPI (base:%u)\n", base);
> + return false;
> + }
> +
> + if ((num == 0) || (base + num > V2M_MAX_SPI)) {
> + pr_err("Number of SPIs (%u) exceed maximum (%u)\n",
> + num, V2M_MAX_SPI - V2M_MIN_SPI + 1);
That warning is a bit odd for the num == 0 case. Perhaps
s/exceed/invalid,/ ?
> + return false;
> + }
> +
> + return true;
> +}
> +
[...]
> +static int __init gicv2m_init_one(struct device_node *node,
> + struct irq_domain *parent)
> +{
> + int ret;
> + struct v2m_data *v2m;
> +
> + v2m = kzalloc(sizeof(struct v2m_data), GFP_KERNEL);
Minor nit: sizeof(*v2m) would be preferable.
> + if (!v2m) {
> + pr_err("Failed to allocate struct v2m_data.\n");
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + }
> +
> + ret = of_address_to_resource(node, 0, &v2m->res);
> + if (ret) {
> + pr_err("Failed to allocate v2m resource.\n");
> + goto err_free_v2m;
> + }
> +
> + v2m->base = ioremap(v2m->res.start, resource_size(&v2m->res));
> + if (!v2m->base) {
> + pr_err("Failed to map GICv2m resource\n");
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + goto err_free_v2m;
> + }
> +
> + if (!of_property_read_u32(node, "arm,msi-base-spi", &v2m->spi_start) &&
> + !of_property_read_u32(node, "arm,msi-num-spis", &v2m->nr_spis)) {
> + pr_info("Overriding V2M MSI_TYPER (base:%u, num:%u)\n",
> + v2m->spi_start, v2m->nr_spis);
It would be nice if we could warn if only one of these properties is
present.
Thanks,
Mark.
--
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/