lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Sep]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 5/5] irqchip/irq-bcm7038-l1: Support brcm,int-fwd-mask
From
Date
On 22/09/2019 20:08, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>
>
> On 9/22/2019 5:38 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On Fri, 13 Sep 2019 12:15:42 -0700
>> Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On some specific chips like 7211 we need to leave some interrupts
>>> untouched/forwarded to the VPU which is another agent in the system
>>> making use of that interrupt controller hardware (goes to both ARM GIC
>>> and VPU L1 interrupt controller). Make that possible by using the
>>> existing brcm,int-fwd-mask property.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/irqchip/irq-bcm7038-l1.c | 15 +++++++++++++--
>>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-bcm7038-l1.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-bcm7038-l1.c
>>> index 0673a44bbdc2..811a34201dd4 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-bcm7038-l1.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-bcm7038-l1.c
>>> @@ -44,6 +44,7 @@ struct bcm7038_l1_chip {
>>> struct list_head list;
>>> u32 wake_mask[MAX_WORDS];
>>> #endif
>>> + u32 irq_fwd_mask[MAX_WORDS];
>>> u8 affinity[MAX_WORDS * IRQS_PER_WORD];
>>> };
>>>
>>> @@ -265,6 +266,7 @@ static int __init bcm7038_l1_init_one(struct device_node *dn,
>>> resource_size_t sz;
>>> struct bcm7038_l1_cpu *cpu;
>>> unsigned int i, n_words, parent_irq;
>>> + int ret;
>>>
>>> if (of_address_to_resource(dn, idx, &res))
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>> @@ -278,6 +280,14 @@ static int __init bcm7038_l1_init_one(struct device_node *dn,
>>> else if (intc->n_words != n_words)
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>>
>>> + ret = of_property_read_u32_array(dn , "brcm,int-fwd-mask",
>>
>> What is the exact meaning of "fwd"? Forward? FirmWare Dementia?
>
> Here it is meant to be "forward", we have defined this property name
> before for irq-bcm7120-l2.c and felt like reusing the same name to avoid
> multiplying properties would be appropriate, see patch #4. If you prefer
> something named brcm,firmware-configured-mask, let me know.

It's just a name, but I found it a bit confusing. Bah, never mind.

>>
>>> + intc->irq_fwd_mask, n_words);
>>> + if (ret != 0 && ret != -EINVAL) {
>>> + /* property exists but has the wrong number of words */
>>> + pr_err("invalid brcm,int-fwd-mask property\n");
>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> cpu = intc->cpus[idx] = kzalloc(sizeof(*cpu) + n_words * sizeof(u32),
>>> GFP_KERNEL);
>>> if (!cpu)
>>> @@ -288,8 +298,9 @@ static int __init bcm7038_l1_init_one(struct device_node *dn,
>>> return -ENOMEM;
>>>
>>> for (i = 0; i < n_words; i++) {
>>> - l1_writel(0xffffffff, cpu->map_base + reg_mask_set(intc, i));
>>> - cpu->mask_cache[i] = 0xffffffff;
>>> + l1_writel(0xffffffff & ~intc->irq_fwd_mask[i],
>>> + cpu->map_base + reg_mask_set(intc, i));
>>> + cpu->mask_cache[i] = 0xffffffff & ~intc->irq_fwd_mask[i];
>>
>> I seem to remember that (0xffffffff & whatever) == whatever, as long as
>> 'whatever' is a 32bit quantity. So what it this for?
>
> It is 0xffff_ffff & ~whatever here.

Which doesn't change anything.

> In the absence of this property
> being specified, the data is all zeroed out, so we would have
> 0xffff_ffff & 0xffff_ffff which is 0xffff_ffff. If this property is
> specified, we would have one more or bits set, and it would be e.g.:
> 0x100 so we would have 0xffff_ffff & ~(0x100) = 0xffff_feff which is
> what we would want here to preserve whatever the firmware has already
> configured.

OK, I must be stupid:

#include <stdio.h>

int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
unsigned int v = 0x100;
printf ("%x\n", ~v);
}
maz@filthy-habit$ ./x
fffffeff

You might as well OR it with zeroes, if you want.

M.
--
Jazz is not dead, it just smells funny...

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-09-23 10:53    [W:0.114 / U:1.820 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site