All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Anup Patel <apatel@ventanamicro.com>
Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
	Atish Patra <atishp@atishpatra.org>,
	Alistair Francis <Alistair.Francis@wdc.com>,
	Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] irqchip/riscv-intc: Create domain using named fwnode
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2022 15:12:08 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <063b8a5636d6372f37029946b2c3e0f4@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220128052505.859518-3-apatel@ventanamicro.com>

On 2022-01-28 05:25, Anup Patel wrote:
> We should create INTC domain using a synthetic fwnode which will allow
> drivers (such as RISC-V SBI IPI driver, RISC-V timer driver, RISC-V
> PMU driver, etc) not having dedicated DT/ACPI node to directly create
> interrupt mapping for standard local interrupt numbers defined by the
> RISC-V privileged specification.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <apatel@ventanamicro.com>
> ---
>  arch/riscv/include/asm/irq.h      |  2 ++
>  arch/riscv/kernel/irq.c           | 13 +++++++++++++
>  drivers/clocksource/timer-clint.c | 13 +++++++------
>  drivers/clocksource/timer-riscv.c | 11 ++---------
>  drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-intc.c  | 12 ++++++++++--
>  drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c | 19 +++++++++++--------
>  6 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/irq.h 
> b/arch/riscv/include/asm/irq.h
> index e4c435509983..f85ebaf07505 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/irq.h
> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/irq.h
> @@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
> 
>  #include <asm-generic/irq.h>
> 
> +extern struct fwnode_handle *riscv_intc_fwnode(void);
> +
>  extern void __init init_IRQ(void);
> 
>  #endif /* _ASM_RISCV_IRQ_H */
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/irq.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/irq.c
> index 7207fa08d78f..f2fed78ab659 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/irq.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/irq.c
> @@ -7,9 +7,22 @@
> 
>  #include <linux/interrupt.h>
>  #include <linux/irqchip.h>
> +#include <linux/irqdomain.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
>  #include <linux/seq_file.h>
>  #include <asm/smp.h>
> 
> +static struct fwnode_handle *intc_fwnode;
> +
> +struct fwnode_handle *riscv_intc_fwnode(void)
> +{
> +	if (!intc_fwnode)
> +		intc_fwnode = irq_domain_alloc_named_fwnode("RISCV-INTC");
> +
> +	return intc_fwnode;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(riscv_intc_fwnode);

Why is this created outside of the root interrupt controller driver?
Furthermore, why do you need to create a new fwnode the first place?
As far as I can tell, the INTC does have a node, and what you don't
have is the firmware linkage between PMU (an others) and the INTC.

what you should have instead is something like:

static struct fwnode_handle *(*__get_root_intc_node)(void);
struct fwnode_handle *riscv_get_root_intc_hwnode(void)
{
         if (__get_root_intc_node)
                 return __get_root_intc_node();

         return NULL;
}

and the corresponding registration interface.

But either way, something breaks: the INTC has one node per CPU, and
expect one irqdomain per CPU. Having a single fwnode completely breaks
the INTC driver (and probably the irqdomain list, as we don't check for
duplicate entries).

> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-intc.c 
> b/drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-intc.c
> index b65bd8878d4f..26ed62c11768 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-intc.c
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-intc.c
> @@ -112,8 +112,16 @@ static int __init riscv_intc_init(struct 
> device_node *node,
>  	if (riscv_hartid_to_cpuid(hartid) != smp_processor_id())
>  		return 0;
> 
> -	intc_domain = irq_domain_add_linear(node, BITS_PER_LONG,
> -					    &riscv_intc_domain_ops, NULL);
> +	/*
> +	 * Create INTC domain using a synthetic fwnode which will allow
> +	 * drivers (such as RISC-V SBI IPI driver, RISC-V timer driver,
> +	 * RISC-V PMU driver, etc) not having dedicated DT/ACPI node to
> +	 * directly create interrupt mapping for standard local interrupt
> +	 * numbers defined by the RISC-V privileged specification.
> +	 */
> +	intc_domain = irq_domain_create_linear(riscv_intc_fwnode(),
> +					       BITS_PER_LONG,
> +					       &riscv_intc_domain_ops, NULL);

This is what I'm talking about. It is simply broken. So either you don't
need a per-CPU node (and the DT was bad the first place), or you 
absolutely need
one (and the whole 'well-known/default domain' doesn't work at all).

Either way, this patch is plain wrong.


         M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Anup Patel <apatel@ventanamicro.com>
Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
	Atish Patra <atishp@atishpatra.org>,
	Alistair Francis <Alistair.Francis@wdc.com>,
	Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] irqchip/riscv-intc: Create domain using named fwnode
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2022 15:12:08 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <063b8a5636d6372f37029946b2c3e0f4@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220128052505.859518-3-apatel@ventanamicro.com>

On 2022-01-28 05:25, Anup Patel wrote:
> We should create INTC domain using a synthetic fwnode which will allow
> drivers (such as RISC-V SBI IPI driver, RISC-V timer driver, RISC-V
> PMU driver, etc) not having dedicated DT/ACPI node to directly create
> interrupt mapping for standard local interrupt numbers defined by the
> RISC-V privileged specification.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <apatel@ventanamicro.com>
> ---
>  arch/riscv/include/asm/irq.h      |  2 ++
>  arch/riscv/kernel/irq.c           | 13 +++++++++++++
>  drivers/clocksource/timer-clint.c | 13 +++++++------
>  drivers/clocksource/timer-riscv.c | 11 ++---------
>  drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-intc.c  | 12 ++++++++++--
>  drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c | 19 +++++++++++--------
>  6 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/irq.h 
> b/arch/riscv/include/asm/irq.h
> index e4c435509983..f85ebaf07505 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/irq.h
> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/irq.h
> @@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
> 
>  #include <asm-generic/irq.h>
> 
> +extern struct fwnode_handle *riscv_intc_fwnode(void);
> +
>  extern void __init init_IRQ(void);
> 
>  #endif /* _ASM_RISCV_IRQ_H */
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/irq.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/irq.c
> index 7207fa08d78f..f2fed78ab659 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/irq.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/irq.c
> @@ -7,9 +7,22 @@
> 
>  #include <linux/interrupt.h>
>  #include <linux/irqchip.h>
> +#include <linux/irqdomain.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
>  #include <linux/seq_file.h>
>  #include <asm/smp.h>
> 
> +static struct fwnode_handle *intc_fwnode;
> +
> +struct fwnode_handle *riscv_intc_fwnode(void)
> +{
> +	if (!intc_fwnode)
> +		intc_fwnode = irq_domain_alloc_named_fwnode("RISCV-INTC");
> +
> +	return intc_fwnode;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(riscv_intc_fwnode);

Why is this created outside of the root interrupt controller driver?
Furthermore, why do you need to create a new fwnode the first place?
As far as I can tell, the INTC does have a node, and what you don't
have is the firmware linkage between PMU (an others) and the INTC.

what you should have instead is something like:

static struct fwnode_handle *(*__get_root_intc_node)(void);
struct fwnode_handle *riscv_get_root_intc_hwnode(void)
{
         if (__get_root_intc_node)
                 return __get_root_intc_node();

         return NULL;
}

and the corresponding registration interface.

But either way, something breaks: the INTC has one node per CPU, and
expect one irqdomain per CPU. Having a single fwnode completely breaks
the INTC driver (and probably the irqdomain list, as we don't check for
duplicate entries).

> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-intc.c 
> b/drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-intc.c
> index b65bd8878d4f..26ed62c11768 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-intc.c
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-intc.c
> @@ -112,8 +112,16 @@ static int __init riscv_intc_init(struct 
> device_node *node,
>  	if (riscv_hartid_to_cpuid(hartid) != smp_processor_id())
>  		return 0;
> 
> -	intc_domain = irq_domain_add_linear(node, BITS_PER_LONG,
> -					    &riscv_intc_domain_ops, NULL);
> +	/*
> +	 * Create INTC domain using a synthetic fwnode which will allow
> +	 * drivers (such as RISC-V SBI IPI driver, RISC-V timer driver,
> +	 * RISC-V PMU driver, etc) not having dedicated DT/ACPI node to
> +	 * directly create interrupt mapping for standard local interrupt
> +	 * numbers defined by the RISC-V privileged specification.
> +	 */
> +	intc_domain = irq_domain_create_linear(riscv_intc_fwnode(),
> +					       BITS_PER_LONG,
> +					       &riscv_intc_domain_ops, NULL);

This is what I'm talking about. It is simply broken. So either you don't
need a per-CPU node (and the DT was bad the first place), or you 
absolutely need
one (and the whole 'well-known/default domain' doesn't work at all).

Either way, this patch is plain wrong.


         M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

  reply	other threads:[~2022-02-17 15:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-01-28  5:24 [PATCH v2 0/6] RISC-V IPI Improvements Anup Patel
2022-01-28  5:24 ` Anup Patel
2022-01-28  5:25 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] RISC-V: Clear SIP bit only when using SBI IPI operations Anup Patel
2022-01-28  5:25   ` Anup Patel
2022-01-28  5:25 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] irqchip/riscv-intc: Create domain using named fwnode Anup Patel
2022-01-28  5:25   ` Anup Patel
2022-02-17 15:12   ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2022-02-17 15:12     ` Marc Zyngier
2022-02-19  3:38     ` Anup Patel
2022-02-19  3:38       ` Anup Patel
2022-02-19  9:32       ` Marc Zyngier
2022-02-19  9:32         ` Marc Zyngier
2022-02-19 13:03         ` Anup Patel
2022-02-19 13:03           ` Anup Patel
2022-02-21  9:07           ` Marc Zyngier
2022-02-21  9:07             ` Marc Zyngier
2022-02-21  9:38             ` Anup Patel
2022-02-21  9:38               ` Anup Patel
2022-02-19 14:51         ` Jessica Clarke
2022-02-19 14:51           ` Jessica Clarke
2022-02-21  9:25           ` Marc Zyngier
2022-02-21  9:25             ` Marc Zyngier
2022-02-21  9:44             ` Anup Patel
2022-02-21  9:44               ` Anup Patel
2022-01-28  5:25 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] RISC-V: Treat IPIs as normal Linux IRQs Anup Patel
2022-01-28  5:25   ` Anup Patel
2022-01-28  5:25 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] RISC-V: Allow marking IPIs as suitable for remote FENCEs Anup Patel
2022-01-28  5:25   ` Anup Patel
2022-01-28  5:25 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] RISC-V: Use IPIs for remote TLB flush when possible Anup Patel
2022-01-28  5:25   ` Anup Patel
2022-01-28  5:25 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] RISC-V: Use IPIs for remote icache " Anup Patel
2022-01-28  5:25   ` Anup Patel

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=063b8a5636d6372f37029946b2c3e0f4@kernel.org \
    --to=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=Alistair.Francis@wdc.com \
    --cc=anup@brainfault.org \
    --cc=apatel@ventanamicro.com \
    --cc=atishp@atishpatra.org \
    --cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
    --cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.