From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Cc: Lior Amsalem <alior@marvell.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
Maen Suleiman <maen@marvell.com>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>,
Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@free-electrons.com>,
Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 05/11] of: pci: add registry of MSI chips
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 11:17:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130801111702.5f85dc91@skate> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130729125826.GH23152@manwe>
Dear Thierry Reding,
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 14:58:27 +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > +static inline struct irq_domain *irq_domain_add_msi(struct device_node *of_node,
> > + unsigned int size,
> > + const struct irq_domain_ops *ops,
> > + struct msi_chip *msi_chip,
> > + void *host_data)
> > +{
> > + return __irq_domain_add(of_node, size, size, 0, ops,
> > + msi_chip, host_data);
> > }
>
> Given that the majority of interrupt controllers probably don't have any
> MSI functionality, I wonder if perhaps this should be done in a more
> helper-oriented way, see below...
I'm not sure I get the relation between this comment on this specific
part of the code and the match helpers suggestion that you did below.
Could you explain?
> > +struct irq_domain *irq_find_msi(struct device_node *node)
> > +{
> > + struct irq_domain *h, *found = NULL;
> > +
> > + mutex_lock(&irq_domain_mutex);
> > + list_for_each_entry(h, &irq_domain_list, link) {
> > + if (!h->msi_chip)
> > + continue;
> > + if (h->of_node && h->of_node == node) {
> > + found = h;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + }
> > + mutex_unlock(&irq_domain_mutex);
> > + return found;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(irq_find_msi);
>
> This doesn't quite copy what irq_find_host() does, since it ignores the
> associated ops->match().
>
> But given that ops->match() already provides a way to hook into the
> lookup, perhaps we could add a function such as this:
>
> int irq_domain_supports_msi(struct irq_domain *d, struct device_node *node)
> {
> if ((d->of_node == NULL) || (d->of_node != node))
> return 0;
>
> return d->msi_chip != NULL;
> }
>
> Then use that in drivers that expose MSI functionality via an IRQ domain
> like this:
>
> static const struct irq_domain_ops foo_irq_domain_ops = {
> ...
> .match = irq_domain_supports_msi,
> ...
> };
>
> One problem with this is that it doesn't solve your problem where two
> different IRQ domains are exposed by the same device, because the
> irq_find_host() will still match the MSI IRQ domain for the non-MSI
> device node as well. This could be solved by adding another match
> function...
I've given this some thought, and I don't see how ->match() functions
can solve the problem. The irq_find_host() is simply given as input a
DT node, and is asked to find the irqdomain attached to this DT node.
To do so, for each irqdomain in the system, it calls the ->match()
operation, or does some default DT node equality checking. However,
nor the irq_find_host() function, nor a custom ->match() function has a
way of knowing whether what you're looking for is the "normal" IRQ
controller, or the MSI controller.
> This goes in hand with the helper-style API that I mentioned above. But
> it's really up to Grant to decide which way he wants this to go.
Again, I am not sure what you meant with "helper-style API". I do
understand the idea of providing a helper irq_domain_supports_msi()
that can be used as the ->match() operation in irq_domain_ops, but I
fail to see how this solves the problem.
Thanks!
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com (Thomas Petazzoni)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCHv5 05/11] of: pci: add registry of MSI chips
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 11:17:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130801111702.5f85dc91@skate> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130729125826.GH23152@manwe>
Dear Thierry Reding,
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 14:58:27 +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > +static inline struct irq_domain *irq_domain_add_msi(struct device_node *of_node,
> > + unsigned int size,
> > + const struct irq_domain_ops *ops,
> > + struct msi_chip *msi_chip,
> > + void *host_data)
> > +{
> > + return __irq_domain_add(of_node, size, size, 0, ops,
> > + msi_chip, host_data);
> > }
>
> Given that the majority of interrupt controllers probably don't have any
> MSI functionality, I wonder if perhaps this should be done in a more
> helper-oriented way, see below...
I'm not sure I get the relation between this comment on this specific
part of the code and the match helpers suggestion that you did below.
Could you explain?
> > +struct irq_domain *irq_find_msi(struct device_node *node)
> > +{
> > + struct irq_domain *h, *found = NULL;
> > +
> > + mutex_lock(&irq_domain_mutex);
> > + list_for_each_entry(h, &irq_domain_list, link) {
> > + if (!h->msi_chip)
> > + continue;
> > + if (h->of_node && h->of_node == node) {
> > + found = h;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + }
> > + mutex_unlock(&irq_domain_mutex);
> > + return found;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(irq_find_msi);
>
> This doesn't quite copy what irq_find_host() does, since it ignores the
> associated ops->match().
>
> But given that ops->match() already provides a way to hook into the
> lookup, perhaps we could add a function such as this:
>
> int irq_domain_supports_msi(struct irq_domain *d, struct device_node *node)
> {
> if ((d->of_node == NULL) || (d->of_node != node))
> return 0;
>
> return d->msi_chip != NULL;
> }
>
> Then use that in drivers that expose MSI functionality via an IRQ domain
> like this:
>
> static const struct irq_domain_ops foo_irq_domain_ops = {
> ...
> .match = irq_domain_supports_msi,
> ...
> };
>
> One problem with this is that it doesn't solve your problem where two
> different IRQ domains are exposed by the same device, because the
> irq_find_host() will still match the MSI IRQ domain for the non-MSI
> device node as well. This could be solved by adding another match
> function...
I've given this some thought, and I don't see how ->match() functions
can solve the problem. The irq_find_host() is simply given as input a
DT node, and is asked to find the irqdomain attached to this DT node.
To do so, for each irqdomain in the system, it calls the ->match()
operation, or does some default DT node equality checking. However,
nor the irq_find_host() function, nor a custom ->match() function has a
way of knowing whether what you're looking for is the "normal" IRQ
controller, or the MSI controller.
> This goes in hand with the helper-style API that I mentioned above. But
> it's really up to Grant to decide which way he wants this to go.
Again, I am not sure what you meant with "helper-style API". I do
understand the idea of providing a helper irq_domain_supports_msi()
that can be used as the ->match() operation in irq_domain_ops, but I
fail to see how this solves the problem.
Thanks!
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-01 9:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 106+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-15 11:52 [PATCHv5 00/11] MSI support for Marvell EBU PCIe driver Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` [PATCHv5 01/11] irqdomain: add irq_alloc_mapping() function Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-16 8:31 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-16 8:31 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-28 4:11 ` Grant Likely
2013-07-28 4:11 ` Grant Likely
2013-07-15 11:52 ` [PATCHv5 02/11] PCI: use weak functions for MSI arch-specific functions Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-25 18:37 ` Thierry Reding
2013-07-25 18:37 ` Thierry Reding
2013-07-25 18:37 ` Thierry Reding
2013-07-25 20:27 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-07-25 20:27 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-07-25 20:27 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-07-15 11:52 ` [PATCHv5 03/11] PCI: remove ARCH_SUPPORTS_MSI kconfig option Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` [PATCHv5 04/11] PCI: Introduce new MSI chip infrastructure Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-25 18:40 ` Thierry Reding
2013-07-25 18:40 ` Thierry Reding
2013-07-25 20:26 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-07-25 20:26 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-07-15 11:52 ` [PATCHv5 05/11] of: pci: add registry of MSI chips Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 16:12 ` Rob Herring
2013-07-15 16:12 ` Rob Herring
2013-07-28 4:33 ` Grant Likely
2013-07-28 4:33 ` Grant Likely
2013-07-28 14:27 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-28 14:27 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-29 6:54 ` Thierry Reding
2013-07-29 6:54 ` Thierry Reding
2013-07-29 12:26 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-29 12:26 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-29 12:58 ` Thierry Reding
2013-07-29 12:58 ` Thierry Reding
2013-07-29 13:04 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-29 13:04 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-08-01 9:17 ` Thomas Petazzoni [this message]
2013-08-01 9:17 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-31 15:14 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-31 15:14 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` [PATCHv5 06/11] irqchip: armada-370-xp: properly request resources Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` [PATCHv5 07/11] irqchip: armada-370-xp: implement MSI support Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` [PATCHv5 08/11] ARM: pci: add ->add_bus() and ->remove_bus() hooks to hw_pci Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-16 8:29 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-16 8:29 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-25 16:53 ` Thierry Reding
2013-07-25 16:53 ` Thierry Reding
2013-08-07 9:13 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-08-07 9:13 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-08-07 13:37 ` Thierry Reding
2013-08-07 13:37 ` Thierry Reding
2013-08-07 15:06 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-08-07 15:06 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-25 16:57 ` Thierry Reding
2013-07-25 16:57 ` Thierry Reding
2013-07-26 8:13 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-26 8:13 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-26 11:49 ` Jason Cooper
2013-07-26 11:49 ` Jason Cooper
2013-07-26 22:46 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-07-26 22:46 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-07-29 12:31 ` Thierry Reding
2013-07-29 12:31 ` Thierry Reding
2013-07-15 11:52 ` [PATCHv5 09/11] ARM: mvebu: the MPIC now provides MSI controller features Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` [PATCHv5 10/11] PCI: mvebu: add support for MSI Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` [PATCHv5 11/11] ARM: mvebu: link PCIe controllers to the MSI controller Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 11:52 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-15 15:34 ` [PATCHv5 00/11] MSI support for Marvell EBU PCIe driver Stephen Warren
2013-07-15 15:34 ` Stephen Warren
2013-07-15 16:27 ` Thierry Reding
2013-07-15 16:27 ` Thierry Reding
2013-07-16 8:33 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-16 8:33 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-16 21:05 ` Thierry Reding
2013-07-16 21:05 ` Thierry Reding
2013-07-16 21:43 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-16 21:43 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-23 0:30 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-07-23 0:30 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-07-15 17:33 ` Jason Cooper
2013-07-15 17:33 ` Jason Cooper
2013-07-16 8:43 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-16 8:43 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-16 13:15 ` Jason Cooper
2013-07-16 13:15 ` Jason Cooper
2013-07-16 13:39 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-16 13:39 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-07-25 18:49 ` Thierry Reding
2013-07-25 18:49 ` Thierry Reding
2013-07-25 19:02 ` Jason Cooper
2013-07-25 19:02 ` Jason Cooper
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=20130801111702.5f85dc91@skate \
--to=thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=alior@marvell.com \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com \
--cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=gregory.clement@free-electrons.com \
--cc=jason@lakedaemon.net \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=maen@marvell.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
/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.