lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Feb]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 02/35] ARM: davinci: select GENERIC_IRQ_MULTI_HANDLER
śr., 6 lut 2019 o 13:39 Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@ti.com> napisał(a):
>
> On 31/01/19 7:08 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/cp_intc.c b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/cp_intc.c
> > index 67805ca74ff8..b9aec3c48a6a 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/cp_intc.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/cp_intc.c
> > @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
> > #include <linux/of_address.h>
> > #include <linux/of_irq.h>
> >
> > +#include <asm/exception.h>
> > #include <mach/common.h>
> > #include "cp_intc.h"
> >
> > @@ -97,6 +98,16 @@ static struct irq_chip cp_intc_irq_chip = {
> >
> > static struct irq_domain *cp_intc_domain;
> >
> > +static asmlinkage void __exception_irq_entry
> > +cp_intc_handle_irq(struct pt_regs *regs)
> > +{
> > + int irqnr = cp_intc_read(CP_INTC_PRIO_IDX);
> > +
> > + irqnr &= 0xff;
> > +
> > + handle_domain_irq(cp_intc_domain, irqnr, regs);
>
> This leaves out spurious interrupt handling present in existing assembly
> code. Can you add it back. May be use omap_intc_handle_irq() as an
> example for handling spurious IRQs.
>

Hi Sekhar,

I started looking at this one and noticed that the manual says
PRI_INDX field in the GPIR register is in bits 0-9 (mask 0x3ff) while
the assembly logically ANDs it with 0xff. I guess it's because there
can be no more interrupts than 255 but I'd at least explain it in a
comment. Or should we use the proper mask? What do you think?

Bart

> > +}
> > +
>
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/irq.c b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/irq.c
> > index 952dc126c390..3bbbef78d9ac 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/irq.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/irq.c
> > @@ -28,11 +28,13 @@
> > #include <mach/cputype.h>
> > #include <mach/common.h>
> > #include <asm/mach/irq.h>
> > +#include <asm/exception.h>
> >
> > #define FIQ_REG0_OFFSET 0x0000
> > #define FIQ_REG1_OFFSET 0x0004
> > #define IRQ_REG0_OFFSET 0x0008
> > #define IRQ_REG1_OFFSET 0x000C
> > +#define IRQ_IRQENTRY_OFFSET 0x0014
> > #define IRQ_ENT_REG0_OFFSET 0x0018
> > #define IRQ_ENT_REG1_OFFSET 0x001C
> > #define IRQ_INCTL_REG_OFFSET 0x0020
> > @@ -45,6 +47,11 @@ static inline void davinci_irq_writel(unsigned long value, int offset)
> > __raw_writel(value, davinci_intc_base + offset);
> > }
> >
> > +static inline unsigned long davinci_irq_readl(int offset)
> > +{
> > + return __raw_readl(davinci_intc_base + offset);
> > +}
>
> Can we use readl_relaxed() here? I know there is existing __raw_writel()
> usage. May be add a patch to fix the existing code first.
>
> Thanks,
> Sekhar

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-02-07 16:50    [W:0.129 / U:5.884 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site