lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Nov]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/4] irqchip: sifive-plic: More flexible plic_irq_toggle()
On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 7:09 AM Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com> wrote:
>
> On 11/27/18 2:03 AM, Anup Patel wrote:
> > We make plic_irq_toggle() more generic so that we can enable/disable
> > hwirq for given cpumask. This generic plic_irq_toggle() will be
> > eventually used to implement set_affinity for PLIC driver.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c | 79 +++++++++++++++----------------
> > 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c
> > index 56fce648a901..95b4b92ca9b8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c
> > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c
> > @@ -55,19 +55,26 @@
> > #define CONTEXT_THRESHOLD 0x00
> > #define CONTEXT_CLAIM 0x04
> >
> > -static void __iomem *plic_regs;
> > -
> > struct plic_handler {
> > bool present;
> > - int ctxid;
> > void __iomem *hart_base;
> > raw_spinlock_t enable_lock;
> > void __iomem *enable_base;
> > };
> > +
> > static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct plic_handler, plic_handlers);
> >
> > -static inline void plic_toggle(struct plic_handler *handler,
> > - int hwirq, int enable)
> > +struct plic_hw {
> > + u32 nr_irqs;
> > + u32 nr_handlers;
> > + u32 nr_mapped;
>
> Why these three are moved inside a structure? I don't see them being
> used outside plic_init. Am I missing something ?

Yes, these are not used outside plic_init at the moment but these will be
eventually used to implement pm_suspend() and pm_resume() callbacks.

In general, these details can be used for debug sanity checks as well
since these are critical details about PLIC HW.

>
> > + void __iomem *regs;
> > + struct irq_domain *irqdomain;
> > +};
> > +
> > +static struct plic_hw plic;
> > +
> > +static void plic_toggle(struct plic_handler *handler, int hwirq, int enable)
> > {
> > u32 __iomem *reg = handler->enable_base + (hwirq / 32);
> > u32 hwirq_mask = 1 << (hwirq % 32);
> > @@ -80,27 +87,23 @@ static inline void plic_toggle(struct plic_handler *handler,
> > raw_spin_unlock(&handler->enable_lock);
> > }
> >
> > -static inline void plic_irq_toggle(struct irq_data *d, int enable)
> > +static void plic_irq_toggle(const struct cpumask *mask, int hwirq, int enable)
> > {
> > int cpu;
> >
> > - writel(enable, plic_regs + PRIORITY_BASE + d->hwirq * PRIORITY_PER_ID);
> > - for_each_cpu(cpu, irq_data_get_affinity_mask(d)) {
> > - struct plic_handler *handler = per_cpu_ptr(&plic_handlers, cpu);
> > -
> > - if (handler->present)
> > - plic_toggle(handler, d->hwirq, enable);
> > - }
> > + writel(enable, plic.regs + PRIORITY_BASE + hwirq * PRIORITY_PER_ID);
> > + for_each_cpu(cpu, mask)
> > + plic_toggle(per_cpu_ptr(&plic_handlers, cpu), hwirq, enable);
>
> Any specific reason to remove the handler->present check.
>
> Moreover, only this part matches commit text. Most of the other changes
> looks like cosmetic cleanup because of variable is moved to a structure.
> May be separate patch for those changes if they are are required at all.

Actually, these are two changes:
1. Making plic_irq_toggle() flexible
2. Add struct plic_hw to represent global PLIC HW details

I agree this patch is still a mess. I had broken down one big patch into
a patch series at time of sending to LKML but it seems I did a bad job
of breaking into granular patches.

>
> > }
> >
> > static void plic_irq_enable(struct irq_data *d)
> > {
> > - plic_irq_toggle(d, 1);
> > + plic_irq_toggle(irq_data_get_affinity_mask(d), d->hwirq, 1);
> > }
> >
> > static void plic_irq_disable(struct irq_data *d)
> > {
> > - plic_irq_toggle(d, 0);
> > + plic_irq_toggle(irq_data_get_affinity_mask(d), d->hwirq, 0);
> > }
> >
> > static struct irq_chip plic_chip = {
> > @@ -127,8 +130,6 @@ static const struct irq_domain_ops plic_irqdomain_ops = {
> > .xlate = irq_domain_xlate_onecell,
> > };
> >
> > -static struct irq_domain *plic_irqdomain;
> > -
> > /*
> > * Handling an interrupt is a two-step process: first you claim the interrupt
> > * by reading the claim register, then you complete the interrupt by writing
> > @@ -145,7 +146,7 @@ static void plic_handle_irq(struct pt_regs *regs)
> >
> > csr_clear(sie, SIE_SEIE);
> > while ((hwirq = readl(claim))) {
> > - int irq = irq_find_mapping(plic_irqdomain, hwirq);
> > + int irq = irq_find_mapping(plic.irqdomain, hwirq);
> >
> > if (unlikely(irq <= 0))
> > pr_warn_ratelimited("can't find mapping for hwirq %lu\n",
> > @@ -174,36 +175,34 @@ static int plic_find_hart_id(struct device_node *node)
> > static int __init plic_init(struct device_node *node,
> > struct device_node *parent)
> > {
> > - int error = 0, nr_handlers, nr_mapped = 0, i;
> > - u32 nr_irqs;
> > + int error = 0, i;
> >
> > - if (plic_regs) {
> > + if (plic.regs) {
> > pr_warn("PLIC already present.\n");
> > return -ENXIO;
> > }
> >
> > - plic_regs = of_iomap(node, 0);
> > - if (WARN_ON(!plic_regs))
> > + plic.regs = of_iomap(node, 0);
> > + if (WARN_ON(!plic.regs))
> > return -EIO;
> >
> > error = -EINVAL;
> > - of_property_read_u32(node, "riscv,ndev", &nr_irqs);
> > - if (WARN_ON(!nr_irqs))
> > + of_property_read_u32(node, "riscv,ndev", &plic.nr_irqs);
> > + if (WARN_ON(!plic.nr_irqs))
> > goto out_iounmap;
> >
> > - nr_handlers = of_irq_count(node);
> > - if (WARN_ON(!nr_handlers))
> > + plic.nr_handlers = of_irq_count(node);
> > + if (WARN_ON(!plic.nr_handlers))
> > goto out_iounmap;
> > - if (WARN_ON(nr_handlers < num_possible_cpus()))
> > + if (WARN_ON(plic.nr_handlers < num_possible_cpus()))
> > goto out_iounmap;
> >
> > - error = -ENOMEM;
> > - plic_irqdomain = irq_domain_add_linear(node, nr_irqs + 1,
> > - &plic_irqdomain_ops, NULL);
> > - if (WARN_ON(!plic_irqdomain))
> > + plic.irqdomain = irq_domain_add_linear(node, plic.nr_irqs + 1,
> > + &plic_irqdomain_ops, NULL);
> > + if (WARN_ON(!plic.irqdomain))
> > goto out_iounmap;
> >
>
> Should we return EINVAL if irq_domain_add_linear fails ? Earlier, it was
> returning ENOMEM.

Sure, I will update this.

>
> > - for (i = 0; i < nr_handlers; i++) {
> > + for (i = 0; i < plic.nr_handlers; i++) {
> > struct of_phandle_args parent;
> > struct plic_handler *handler;
> > irq_hw_number_t hwirq;
> > @@ -227,27 +226,27 @@ static int __init plic_init(struct device_node *node,
> > cpu = riscv_hartid_to_cpuid(hartid);
> > handler = per_cpu_ptr(&plic_handlers, cpu);
> > handler->present = true;
> > - handler->ctxid = i;
>
>
> The previous patch removed all the usage of ctxid. So this line also can
> be included in that patch as well to make it more coherent.

Sure, I will move it to previous patch.

Thanks for the detailed review.

Regards,
Anup

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-11-30 04:52    [W:0.095 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site