Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] irqchip: irq-mvebu-icu: new driver for Marvell ICU

[Marc Zyngier]

On 20/06/17 14:46, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Mon, 19 Jun 2017 18:40:53 +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> 
>>> +	if (msg->address_lo) {  
>>
>> This should probably test both _lo and _hi.
> 
> Not sure what test you want to do on _hi. Since the physical address
> I'm using is below the 4 GB boundary, the high bits are all zeroes,
> even for a valid address. So to distinguish whether we're configuring
> or de-configuring the MSI, I don't see how the address_hi value is
> useful.
> 
> Am I missing something obvious here?

There is a few things: this driver could (mostly) work with a GICv3
distributor (located way above 4GB) instead of the GICP, and I'd rather
make no assumption of where GICP is located in the memory map.

So I'd rather see:

	if (msg->address_lo || msg->address_hi) {
		[...]
	} else {
		/* deconfiguration case */
	}

[...]

>> I think you may want to issue a irq_set_type here, because it is not
>> completely clear to me if the core code will be doing it by default for
>> you...
> 
> It's not needed I believe. I've added some trace in gic_set_type(), and
> it's really called for every ICU interrupt as expected, as soon as the
> interrupt is configured. And indeed, if you look at __setup_irq(), it
> calls __irq_set_trigger(), see
> http://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/latest/source/kernel/irq/manage.c#L1309.
> I've added a dump_stack() in git_set_type() to make sure when I was
> getting called for the SPI interrupts corresponding to the GICP/ICU
> stuff. Here is one example, from the XHCI driver:
> 
> [    1.815712] CPU: 2 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 4.12.0-rc1 #613
> [    1.822180] Hardware name: Marvell Armada 8040 DB board (DT)
> [    1.827863] Call trace:
> [    1.830329] [<ffff000008088528>] dump_backtrace+0x0/0x228
> [    1.835752] [<ffff00000808881c>] show_stack+0x14/0x20
> [    1.840828] [<ffff00000838fd80>] dump_stack+0x90/0xb0
> [    1.845903] [<ffff0000083bf13c>] gic_set_type+0x94/0x98
> [    1.851154] [<ffff00000810e734>] irq_chip_set_type_parent+0x1c/0x30
> [    1.857449] [<ffff00000810e734>] irq_chip_set_type_parent+0x1c/0x30
> [    1.863743] [<ffff00000810e734>] irq_chip_set_type_parent+0x1c/0x30
> [    1.870037] [<ffff00000810d0a0>] __irq_set_trigger+0x60/0x178
> [    1.875808] [<ffff00000810d764>] __setup_irq+0x5ac/0x690
> [    1.881143] [<ffff00000810da1c>] request_threaded_irq+0xec/0x1c0
> [    1.887177] [<ffff0000086a84dc>] usb_add_hcd+0x50c/0x800
> [    1.892513] [<ffff0000087052ec>] xhci_plat_probe+0x584/0x768
> [    1.898199] [<ffff00000854cc28>] platform_drv_probe+0x58/0xc0
> [    1.903969] [<ffff00000854ad74>] driver_probe_device+0x214/0x2d0
> [    1.910002] [<ffff00000854aedc>] __driver_attach+0xac/0xb0
> [    1.915511] [<ffff000008548ef8>] bus_for_each_dev+0x60/0xa0
> [    1.921107] [<ffff00000854a690>] driver_attach+0x20/0x28
> [    1.926442] [<ffff00000854a1e0>] bus_add_driver+0x110/0x230
> [    1.932038] [<ffff00000854b858>] driver_register+0x60/0xf8
> [    1.937547] [<ffff00000854cb5c>] __platform_driver_register+0x44/0x50
> [    1.944019] [<ffff000008d41a60>] xhci_plat_init+0x2c/0x34
> [    1.949441] [<ffff0000080830f8>] do_one_initcall+0x38/0x120
> [    1.955038] [<ffff000008d00ce8>] kernel_init_freeable+0x198/0x238
> [    1.961159] [<ffff0000088fe470>] kernel_init+0x10/0x100
> [    1.966406] [<ffff000008082ec0>] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x50
> 
> So, whenever you do the request_irq(), __setup_irq() calls
> __irq_set_trigger(), which ends in the ICU ->irq_set_type(), calling
> the GICP MSI domain ->irq_set_type(), calling the GICP inner domain
> ->irq_set_type(), itself calling the GIC ->irq_set_type().

Fair enough.

> 
>>> +	icu->gicp = platform_get_drvdata(gicp_pdev);
>>> +
>>> +	/* Set Clear/Set ICU SPI message address in AP */
>>> +	setspi = mvebu_gicp_setspi_phys_addr(icu->gicp);  
>>
>>
>> I must say that I find this quite horrible. The idea of digging into the
>> internals of another driver and forcing it to blindly dereference a
>> pointer feels just wrong.
>>
>> Instead, why don't you directly pass the device node, and kindly ask the
>> GICP driver to give you the two addresses? Something along the lines of:
>>
>> 	err = mvebu_gicp_get_doorbells(gicp_dn, &setspi, &clrspi);
>> 	if (err)
>> 		[...]
>>
>> which at least gives a the GICP driver chance to check that this is
>> something it knows about. And you can then drop the icu->gicp field.
> 
> ACK, fixed for the next version.
> 
>>> +	/*
>>> +	 * Clean all ICU interrupts with type SPI_NSR, required to
>>> +	 * avoid unpredictable SPI assignments done by firmware.
>>> +	 */
>>> +	for (i = 0 ; i < ICU_MAX_IRQS ; i++) {
>>> +		icu_int = readl(icu->base + ICU_INT_CFG(i));
>>> +		if ((icu_int >> ICU_GROUP_SHIFT) == ICU_GRP_NSR)
>>> +			writel_relaxed(0x0, icu->base + ICU_INT_CFG(i));
>>> +	}  
>>
>> I had questions about the safety of this in a previous review. Do you
>> have any update? Also, shouldn't you check that same thing in the
>> translate callback (so that you detect clashes between firmware and DT)?
> 
> I'm still waiting for feedback from Hannah and Yehuda in Cc on this
> question. They should answer soon, hopefully.
> 
>> Otherwise looking pretty neat.
> 
> Thanks again for the review. You can expect v4 today.

OK, thanks.

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