RE: [PATCH v4 1/3] irqchip: xilinx: Add support for multiple instances

From: Mubin Usman Sayyed
Date: Tue Mar 17 2020 - 04:18:15 EST

Next message: Sergey Senozhatsky: "Re: [PATCH] printk: handle blank console arguments passed in."
Previous message: Adrian Hunter: "Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/6] mmc: host: Add UHS-II support in host layer"
In reply to: Marc Zyngier: "Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] irqchip: xilinx: Add support for multiple instances"
Next in thread: Mubin Usman Sayyed: "[PATCH v4 3/3] irqchip: xilinx: Enable generic irq multi handler"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hi Marc,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2020 8:04 PM
> To: Mubin Usman Sayyed <MUBINUSM@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; jason@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Michal Simek
> <michals@xxxxxxxxxx>; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Siva Durga Prasad Paladugu <sivadur@xxxxxxxxxx>;
> Anirudha Sarangi <anirudh@xxxxxxxxxx>; Anirudha Sarangi
> <anirudh@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] irqchip: xilinx: Add support for multiple instances
>
> On 2020-03-16 13:54, Mubin Usman Sayyed wrote:
> > From: Mubin Sayyed <mubin.usman.sayyed@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Added support for cascaded interrupt controllers.
> >
> > Following cascaded configurations have been tested,
> >
> > - peripheral->xilinx-intc->xilinx-intc->gic->Cortexa53 processor
> > on zcu102 board
> > - peripheral->xilinx-intc->xilinx-intc->microblaze processor
> > on kcu105 board
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mubin Sayyed <mubin.usman.sayyed@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Anirudha Sarangi <anirudha.sarangi@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > Changes for v4:
> > - Fixed review comments from Thomas - updated commit
> > message, variable declarations changed to reverse
> > fir tree and cleaned up some code.
> >
> > Changes for v3:
> > - Modified prototype of xintc_write/xintc_read
> > - Fixed review comments regarding indentation/variable
> > names, used BIT
> > - Modified xintc_get_irq_local to return 0
> > in case of failure/no pending interrupts
> > - Fixed return type of xintc_read
> > - Reverted changes related to device name and
> > kept intc_dev as static
> >
> > Changes for v2:
> > - Removed write_fn/read_fn hooks, used xintc_write/
> > xintc_read directly
> > - Moved primary_intc declaration after xintc_irq_chip
> > ---
> > drivers/irqchip/irq-xilinx-intc.c | 121
> > ++++++++++++++++++------------
> > 1 file changed, 71 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-xilinx-intc.c
> > b/drivers/irqchip/irq-xilinx-intc.c
> > index e3043ded8973..65b77720ef2e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-xilinx-intc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-xilinx-intc.c
> > @@ -38,29 +38,32 @@ struct xintc_irq_chip {
> > void __iomem *base;
> > struct irq_domain *root_domain;
> > u32 intr_mask;
> > + struct irq_chip *intc_dev;
>
> What is the need for this pointer? As far as I can see, all the interrupts have
> the same callbacks, and even then, there should be no need to keep a
> pointer to that.
[Mubin]: Agreed, I will fix it in next version.
>
> > + u32 nr_irq;
> > };
> >
> > -static struct xintc_irq_chip *xintc_irqc;
> > +static struct xintc_irq_chip *primary_intc;
> >
> > -static void xintc_write(int reg, u32 data)
> > +static void xintc_write(struct xintc_irq_chip *irqc, int reg, u32
> > data)
> > {
> > if (static_branch_unlikely(&xintc_is_be))
> > - iowrite32be(data, xintc_irqc->base + reg);
> > + iowrite32be(data, irqc->base + reg);
> > else
> > - iowrite32(data, xintc_irqc->base + reg);
> > + iowrite32(data, irqc->base + reg);
> > }
> >
> > -static unsigned int xintc_read(int reg)
> > +static u32 xintc_read(struct xintc_irq_chip *irqc, int reg)
> > {
> > if (static_branch_unlikely(&xintc_is_be))
> > - return ioread32be(xintc_irqc->base + reg);
> > + return ioread32be(irqc->base + reg);
> > else
> > - return ioread32(xintc_irqc->base + reg);
> > + return ioread32(irqc->base + reg);
> > }
> >
> > static void intc_enable_or_unmask(struct irq_data *d) {
> > - unsigned long mask = 1 << d->hwirq;
> > + struct xintc_irq_chip *irqc = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> > + unsigned long mask = BIT(d->hwirq);
> >
> > pr_debug("irq-xilinx: enable_or_unmask: %ld\n", d->hwirq);
> >
> > @@ -69,30 +72,35 @@ static void intc_enable_or_unmask(struct irq_data
> > *d)
> > * acks the irq before calling the interrupt handler
> > */
> > if (irqd_is_level_type(d))
> > - xintc_write(IAR, mask);
> > + xintc_write(irqc, IAR, mask);
> >
> > - xintc_write(SIE, mask);
> > + xintc_write(irqc, SIE, mask);
> > }
> >
> > static void intc_disable_or_mask(struct irq_data *d) {
> > + struct xintc_irq_chip *irqc = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> > +
> > pr_debug("irq-xilinx: disable: %ld\n", d->hwirq);
> > - xintc_write(CIE, 1 << d->hwirq);
> > + xintc_write(irqc, CIE, BIT(d->hwirq));
> > }
> >
> > static void intc_ack(struct irq_data *d) {
> > + struct xintc_irq_chip *irqc = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> > +
> > pr_debug("irq-xilinx: ack: %ld\n", d->hwirq);
> > - xintc_write(IAR, 1 << d->hwirq);
> > + xintc_write(irqc, IAR, BIT(d->hwirq));
> > }
> >
> > static void intc_mask_ack(struct irq_data *d) {
> > - unsigned long mask = 1 << d->hwirq;
> > + struct xintc_irq_chip *irqc = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> > + unsigned long mask = BIT(d->hwirq);
> >
> > pr_debug("irq-xilinx: disable_and_ack: %ld\n", d->hwirq);
> > - xintc_write(CIE, mask);
> > - xintc_write(IAR, mask);
> > + xintc_write(irqc, CIE, mask);
> > + xintc_write(irqc, IAR, mask);
> > }
> >
> > static struct irq_chip intc_dev = {
> > @@ -103,13 +111,28 @@ static struct irq_chip intc_dev = {
> > .irq_mask_ack = intc_mask_ack,
> > };
> >
> > +static unsigned int xintc_get_irq_local(struct xintc_irq_chip *irqc)
> > +{
> > + unsigned int irq = 0;
> > + u32 hwirq;
> > +
> > + hwirq = xintc_read(irqc, IVR);
> > + if (hwirq != -1U)
> > + irq = irq_find_mapping(irqc->root_domain, hwirq);
> > +
> > + pr_debug("irq-xilinx: hwirq=%d, irq=%d\n", hwirq, irq);
> > +
> > + return irq;
> > +}
> > +
> > unsigned int xintc_get_irq(void)
> > {
> > - unsigned int hwirq, irq = -1;
> > + unsigned int irq = -1;
> > + u32 hwirq;
> >
> > - hwirq = xintc_read(IVR);
> > + hwirq = xintc_read(primary_intc, IVR);
> > if (hwirq != -1U)
> > - irq = irq_find_mapping(xintc_irqc->root_domain, hwirq);
> > + irq = irq_find_mapping(primary_intc->root_domain, hwirq);
> >
> > pr_debug("irq-xilinx: hwirq=%d, irq=%d\n", hwirq, irq);
> >
> > @@ -118,15 +141,18 @@ unsigned int xintc_get_irq(void)
> >
> > static int xintc_map(struct irq_domain *d, unsigned int irq,
> > irq_hw_number_t hw) {
> > - if (xintc_irqc->intr_mask & (1 << hw)) {
> > - irq_set_chip_and_handler_name(irq, &intc_dev,
> > - handle_edge_irq, "edge");
> > + struct xintc_irq_chip *irqc = d->host_data;
> > +
> > + if (irqc->intr_mask & BIT(hw)) {
> > + irq_set_chip_and_handler_name(irq, irqc->intc_dev,
> > + handle_edge_irq, "edge");
> > irq_clear_status_flags(irq, IRQ_LEVEL);
> > } else {
> > - irq_set_chip_and_handler_name(irq, &intc_dev,
> > - handle_level_irq, "level");
> > + irq_set_chip_and_handler_name(irq, irqc->intc_dev,
> > + handle_level_irq, "level");
> > irq_set_status_flags(irq, IRQ_LEVEL);
> > }
> > + irq_set_chip_data(irq, irqc);
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > @@ -138,12 +164,14 @@ static const struct irq_domain_ops
> > xintc_irq_domain_ops = { static void xil_intc_irq_handler(struct
> > irq_desc *desc) {
> > struct irq_chip *chip = irq_desc_get_chip(desc);
> > + struct xintc_irq_chip *irqc;
> > u32 pending;
> >
> > + irqc = irq_data_get_irq_handler_data(&desc->irq_data);
> > chained_irq_enter(chip, desc);
> > do {
> > - pending = xintc_get_irq();
> > - if (pending == -1U)
> > + pending = xintc_get_irq_local(irqc);
> > + if (pending == 0U)
>
> nit: I don't think we need to consider the sign of zero.
[Mubin]: I will fix it in next version.
>
> > break;
> > generic_handle_irq(pending);
> > } while (true);
> > @@ -153,28 +181,19 @@ static void xil_intc_irq_handler(struct irq_desc
> > *desc)
> > static int __init xilinx_intc_of_init(struct device_node *intc,
> > struct device_node *parent) {
> > - u32 nr_irq;
> > - int ret, irq;
> > struct xintc_irq_chip *irqc;
> > -
> > - if (xintc_irqc) {
> > - pr_err("irq-xilinx: Multiple instances aren't supported\n");
> > - return -EINVAL;
> > - }
> > + int ret, irq;
> >
> > irqc = kzalloc(sizeof(*irqc), GFP_KERNEL);
> > if (!irqc)
> > return -ENOMEM;
> > -
> > - xintc_irqc = irqc;
> > -
> > irqc->base = of_iomap(intc, 0);
> > BUG_ON(!irqc->base);
> >
> > - ret = of_property_read_u32(intc, "xlnx,num-intr-inputs", &nr_irq);
> > + ret = of_property_read_u32(intc, "xlnx,num-intr-inputs",
> > &irqc->nr_irq);
> > if (ret < 0) {
> > pr_err("irq-xilinx: unable to read xlnx,num-intr-inputs\n");
> > - goto err_alloc;
> > + goto error;
> > }
> >
> > ret = of_property_read_u32(intc, "xlnx,kind-of-intr",
> > &irqc->intr_mask);
> > @@ -183,34 +202,35 @@ static int __init xilinx_intc_of_init(struct
> > device_node *intc,
> > irqc->intr_mask = 0;
> > }
> >
> > - if (irqc->intr_mask >> nr_irq)
> > + if (irqc->intr_mask >> irqc->nr_irq)
> > pr_warn("irq-xilinx: mismatch in kind-of-intr param\n");
> >
> > pr_info("irq-xilinx: %pOF: num_irq=%d, edge=0x%x\n",
> > - intc, nr_irq, irqc->intr_mask);
> > + intc, irqc->nr_irq, irqc->intr_mask);
> >
> > + irqc->intc_dev = &intc_dev;
>
> Based on the above, this should go.
[Mubin]: will do it in next version
>
> >
> > /*
> > * Disable all external interrupts until they are
> > * explicity requested.
> > */
> > - xintc_write(IER, 0);
> > + xintc_write(irqc, IER, 0);
> >
> > /* Acknowledge any pending interrupts just in case. */
> > - xintc_write(IAR, 0xffffffff);
> > + xintc_write(irqc, IAR, 0xffffffff);
> >
> > /* Turn on the Master Enable. */
> > - xintc_write(MER, MER_HIE | MER_ME);
> > - if (!(xintc_read(MER) & (MER_HIE | MER_ME))) {
> > + xintc_write(irqc, MER, MER_HIE | MER_ME);
> > + if (xintc_read(irqc, MER) != (MER_HIE | MER_ME)) {
> > static_branch_enable(&xintc_is_be);
> > - xintc_write(MER, MER_HIE | MER_ME);
> > + xintc_write(irqc, MER, MER_HIE | MER_ME);
> > }
> >
> > - irqc->root_domain = irq_domain_add_linear(intc, nr_irq,
> > + irqc->root_domain = irq_domain_add_linear(intc, irqc->nr_irq,
> > &xintc_irq_domain_ops,
> irqc);
> > if (!irqc->root_domain) {
> > pr_err("irq-xilinx: Unable to create IRQ domain\n");
> > - goto err_alloc;
> > + goto error;
> > }
> >
> > if (parent) {
> > @@ -222,16 +242,17 @@ static int __init xilinx_intc_of_init(struct
> > device_node *intc,
> > } else {
> > pr_err("irq-xilinx: interrupts property not in DT\n");
> > ret = -EINVAL;
> > - goto err_alloc;
> > + goto error;
> > }
> > } else {
> > - irq_set_default_host(irqc->root_domain);
> > + primary_intc = irqc;
> > + irq_set_default_host(primary_intc->root_domain);
>
> Do you still need this irq_set_default_host() horror? I thought
> microblaze
> was fully DT-ified and didn't need this. The use of a non-legacy domain
> tends
> to confirm this.
[Mubin]: I will add patch in next version to remove it.

Thanks,
Mubin
>
> > }
> >
> > return 0;
> >
> > -err_alloc:
> > - xintc_irqc = NULL;
> > +error:
> > + iounmap(irqc->base);
> > kfree(irqc);
> > return ret;
>
> Thanks,
>
> M.
> --
> Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

Next message: Sergey Senozhatsky: "Re: [PATCH] printk: handle blank console arguments passed in."
Previous message: Adrian Hunter: "Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/6] mmc: host: Add UHS-II support in host layer"
In reply to: Marc Zyngier: "Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] irqchip: xilinx: Add support for multiple instances"
Next in thread: Mubin Usman Sayyed: "[PATCH v4 3/3] irqchip: xilinx: Enable generic irq multi handler"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]