lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [BUG] CI20: didn't like hwirq-0x0 to VIRQ8 mapping (rc=-19)
Hi Nikolaus,

Try with this: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/11/22/1831

And don't hesitate to add your Tested-by :)

Cheers,
-Paul


Le ven., déc. 20, 2019 at 17:49, H. Nikolaus Schaller
<hns@goldelico.com> a écrit :
> Hi Paul,
> since v5.5-rc1 the boot log is flooded by a sequence of messages like:
>
> [ 0.000000] NR_IRQS: 222
> [ 0.000000] irq: :interrupt-controller@10001000 didn't like
> hwirq-0x0 to VIRQ8 mapping (rc=-19)
> [ 0.000000] irq: :interrupt-controller@10001000 didn't like
> hwirq-0x1 to VIRQ9 mapping (rc=-19)
> [ 0.000000] irq: :interrupt-controller@10001000 didn't like
> hwirq-0x2 to VIRQ10 mapping (rc=-19)
> [ 0.000000] irq: :interrupt-controller@10001000 didn't like
> hwirq-0x3 to VIRQ11 mapping (rc=-19)
> [ 0.000000] irq: :interrupt-controller@10001000 didn't like
> hwirq-0x4 to VIRQ12 mapping (rc=-19)
> ...
> [ 0.000000] irq: :interrupt-controller@10001000 didn't like
> hwirq-0x3e to VIRQ70 mapping (rc=-19)
> [ 0.000000] irq: :interrupt-controller@10001000 didn't like
> hwirq-0x3f to VIRQ71 mapping (rc=-19)
>
> A handful of /proc/interrupts are nevertheless working.
>
> I have now analyzed the situation a little:
>
> * the message is printed by irq_domain_associate()
> * call sequence is ingenic_intc_of_init() -> irq_domain_add_legacy()
> -> irq_domain_associate_many() -> irq_domain_associate()
> * the reason for the message is that
> domain->ops->map()
> called in irq_domain_associate() returns an error
> * domain->ops is initialized to &irq_generic_chip_ops
> * domain->ops->map is initialized to irq_map_generic_chip()
> * irq_map_generic_chip() calls __irq_get_domain_generic_chip()
> * which returns -ENODEV (-19) if d->gc == NULL
>
> So the location, where the -19 comes from, is found.
>
> Now why is d->gc == NULL in __irq_get_domain_generic_chip() ?
>
> This IMHO seems to be a bad initialization sequence:
>
> * ingenic_intc_of_init() calls firstly irq_domain_add_legacy()
> * which does *not* initialize domain->gc but expects it to be !NULL
> through irq_map_generic_chip()
> * and would only irq_alloc_domain_generic_chips() which initializes
> domain->gc if irq_domain_add_legacy() is successful
> * irq_alloc_domain_generic_chips() would initialize domain->gc by
> calling __irq_alloc_domain_generic_chips()
>
> There are indeed significant changes in drivers/irqchip/irq-ingenic.c
> from v5.4to v5.5-rc1 which have introduced the use of
> irq_domain_add_legacy()
> and irq_alloc_domain_generic_chips() by
>
> 52ecc87642f2 irqchip: ingenic: Error out if IRQ domain creation failed
> 208caadce5d4 irqchip: ingenic: Get virq number from IRQ domain
> 8bc7464b5140 irqchip: ingenic: Alloc generic chips from IRQ domain
> b8b0145f7d0e irqchip: Ingenic: Add process for more than one irq at
> the same time.
>
> Most likely 52ecc87642f2 has changed the call sequence and therefore
> always fails.
>
> Is there some essential patch missing to be upstreamed?
> I have looked but not found anything related in linux-next.
>
> I have also tried reverting 52ecc87642f2 alone but it has conflicts.
>
> But I can revert all 4 commits with an otherwise unchanged setup and
> the messages are gone for me.
>
> How would a fix look like?
>
> BR and thanks,
> Nikolaus
>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-20 18:02    [W:0.069 / U:2.276 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site