| Message ID | 1595927918-19845-4-git-send-email-grzegorz.jaszczyk@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v4,1/5] dt-bindings: irqchip: Add PRU-ICSS interrupt controller bindings | expand |
Hi Marc On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 at 18:37, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote: > > On 2020-07-28 10:18, Grzegorz Jaszczyk wrote: > > From: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com> > > > > The PRUSS INTC has a fixed number of output interrupt lines that are > > connected to a number of processors or other PRUSS instances or other > > devices (like DMA) on the SoC. The output interrupt lines 2 through 9 > > are usually connected to the main Arm host processor and are referred > > to as host interrupts 0 through 7 from ARM/MPU perspective. > > > > All of these 8 host interrupts are not always exclusively connected > > to the Arm interrupt controller. Some SoCs have some interrupt lines > > not connected to the Arm interrupt controller at all, while a few > > others > > have the interrupt lines connected to multiple processors in which they > > need to be partitioned as per SoC integration needs. For example, > > AM437x > > and 66AK2G SoCs have 2 PRUSS instances each and have the host interrupt > > 5 > > connected to the other PRUSS, while AM335x has host interrupt 0 shared > > between MPU and TSC_ADC and host interrupts 6 & 7 shared between MPU > > and > > a DMA controller. > > > > Add logic to the PRUSS INTC driver to ignore both these shared and > > invalid interrupts. > > > > Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com> > > Signed-off-by: Grzegorz Jaszczyk <grzegorz.jaszczyk@linaro.org> > > --- > > v3->v4: > > - Due to changes in DT bindings which converts irqs-reserved > > property from uint8-array to bitmask requested by Rob introduce > > relevant changes in the driver. > > - Merge the irqs-reserved and irqs-shared to one property since they > > can be handled by one logic (relevant change was introduced to DT > > binding). > > This isn't what I asked for in my initial review. > > I repeatedly asked for the *handling* to be common, not for the > properties to be merged. I don't mind either way, but I understood > there were two properties for a good reason. Has this reason gone? Yes, I am aware that you've asked for common handling. Nevertheless due to this change the usage of irqs-shared had to change. Previously Suman's intention was to always skip the irqs-reserved, while allowing to try getting interrupts even from irqs-shared list but in case of failure (during platform_get_irq_byname) it wasn't treated as an error. In other words: in the previous approach if the interrupt from irqs-shared was present in DT interrupts property it was treated as a valid resource. If the irqs-shared interrupt wasn't present in DT interrupts property it was skipped (similar to the irqs-reserved case). Now after your request for handling both in a common way the interpretation of irqs-shared had to change. Therefore there's no need to have seperate property for them. Now it is simpler: if some interrupt is present in irqs-reserved it will be skipped. > > Anyway, I'll come back to it once I start reviewing the series > again. > Ok, thank you, Grzegorz
On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 at 20:48, David Lechner <david@lechnology.com> wrote: > > On 7/28/20 4:18 AM, Grzegorz Jaszczyk wrote: > > From: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com> > > > > The PRUSS INTC has a fixed number of output interrupt lines that are > > connected to a number of processors or other PRUSS instances or other > > devices (like DMA) on the SoC. The output interrupt lines 2 through 9 > > are usually connected to the main Arm host processor and are referred > > to as host interrupts 0 through 7 from ARM/MPU perspective. > > > > All of these 8 host interrupts are not always exclusively connected > > to the Arm interrupt controller. Some SoCs have some interrupt lines > > not connected to the Arm interrupt controller at all, while a few others > > have the interrupt lines connected to multiple processors in which they > > need to be partitioned as per SoC integration needs. For example, AM437x > > and 66AK2G SoCs have 2 PRUSS instances each and have the host interrupt 5 > > connected to the other PRUSS, while AM335x has host interrupt 0 shared > > between MPU and TSC_ADC and host interrupts 6 & 7 shared between MPU and > > a DMA controller. > > > > Add logic to the PRUSS INTC driver to ignore both these shared and > > invalid interrupts. > > If a person wanted to use DMA with a PRU what will handle the mapping > of a PRU event to host interrupt 6 or 7 if they are being ignored here? Mapping can be handled independently: even if a given host interrupt is on irqs-reserved list, the mapping description for it can be provided (e.g. similar to the resource table case passed through rproc subsystem) and nothing prevents this driver from actually routing it. > > > > > Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com> > > Signed-off-by: Grzegorz Jaszczyk <grzegorz.jaszczyk@linaro.org> > > --- > > v3->v4: > > - Due to changes in DT bindings which converts irqs-reserved > > property from uint8-array to bitmask requested by Rob introduce > > relevant changes in the driver. > > - Merge the irqs-reserved and irqs-shared to one property since they > > can be handled by one logic (relevant change was introduced to DT > > binding). > > - Update commit message. > > v2->v3: > > - Extra checks for (intc->irqs[i]) in error/remove path was moved from > > "irqchip/irq-pruss-intc: Add a PRUSS irqchip driver for PRUSS > > interrupts" to this patch > > v1->v2: > > - https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11069757/ > > --- > > drivers/irqchip/irq-pruss-intc.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----- > > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-pruss-intc.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-pruss-intc.c > > index 45b966a..cf9a59b 100644 > > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-pruss-intc.c > > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-pruss-intc.c > > @@ -474,7 +474,7 @@ static int pruss_intc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > struct pruss_intc *intc; > > struct pruss_host_irq_data *host_data[MAX_NUM_HOST_IRQS] = { NULL }; > > int i, irq, ret; > > - u8 max_system_events; > > + u8 max_system_events, invalid_intr = 0; > > > > data = of_device_get_match_data(dev); > > if (!data) > > @@ -496,6 +496,16 @@ static int pruss_intc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > return PTR_ERR(intc->base); > > } > > > > + ret = of_property_read_u8(dev->of_node, "ti,irqs-reserved", > > + &invalid_intr); > > Why not make the variable name match the property name? Sure, I will rename this variable. Thank you for your review, Grzegorz
diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-pruss-intc.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-pruss-intc.c index 45b966a..cf9a59b 100644 --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-pruss-intc.c +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-pruss-intc.c @@ -474,7 +474,7 @@ static int pruss_intc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) struct pruss_intc *intc; struct pruss_host_irq_data *host_data[MAX_NUM_HOST_IRQS] = { NULL }; int i, irq, ret; - u8 max_system_events; + u8 max_system_events, invalid_intr = 0; data = of_device_get_match_data(dev); if (!data) @@ -496,6 +496,16 @@ static int pruss_intc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) return PTR_ERR(intc->base); } + ret = of_property_read_u8(dev->of_node, "ti,irqs-reserved", + &invalid_intr); + + /* + * The irqs-reserved is used only for some SoC's therefore not having + * this property is still valid + */ + if (ret < 0 && ret != -EINVAL) + return ret; + pruss_intc_init(intc); mutex_init(&intc->lock); @@ -506,6 +516,9 @@ static int pruss_intc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) return -ENOMEM; for (i = 0; i < MAX_NUM_HOST_IRQS; i++) { + if (invalid_intr & BIT(i)) + continue; + irq = platform_get_irq_byname(pdev, irq_names[i]); if (irq <= 0) { dev_err(dev, "platform_get_irq_byname failed for %s : %d\n", @@ -533,8 +546,11 @@ static int pruss_intc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) return 0; fail_irq: - while (--i >= 0) - irq_set_chained_handler_and_data(intc->irqs[i], NULL, NULL); + while (--i >= 0) { + if (intc->irqs[i]) + irq_set_chained_handler_and_data(intc->irqs[i], NULL, + NULL); + } irq_domain_remove(intc->domain); @@ -548,8 +564,11 @@ static int pruss_intc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) unsigned int hwirq; int i; - for (i = 0; i < MAX_NUM_HOST_IRQS; i++) - irq_set_chained_handler_and_data(intc->irqs[i], NULL, NULL); + for (i = 0; i < MAX_NUM_HOST_IRQS; i++) { + if (intc->irqs[i]) + irq_set_chained_handler_and_data(intc->irqs[i], NULL, + NULL); + } for (hwirq = 0; hwirq < max_system_events; hwirq++) irq_dispose_mapping(irq_find_mapping(intc->domain, hwirq));