Re: [PATCH 01/11] genirq: Add fasteoi IPI flow

From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
Cc: Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@linaro.org>,
	Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	kernel-team@android.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] genirq: Add fasteoi IPI flow
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2020 10:54:26 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200612105426.39ff61bb@why> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b691a46e-7461-89c8-c760-a1ef9769091f@gmail.com>

On Tue, 19 May 2020 12:47:24 -0700
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 5/19/2020 9:17 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > For irqchips using the fasteoi flow, IPIs are a bit special.
> > 
> > They need to be EOId early (before calling the handler), as
> > funny things may happen in the handler (they do not necessarily
> > behave like a normal interrupt), and that the arch code is
> > already handling the stats.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/irq.h |  1 +
> >  kernel/irq/chip.c   | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  2 files changed, 27 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/linux/irq.h b/include/linux/irq.h
> > index 8d5bc2c237d7..726f94d8b8cc 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/irq.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/irq.h
> > @@ -621,6 +621,7 @@ static inline int irq_set_parent(int irq, int parent_irq)
> >   */
> >  extern void handle_level_irq(struct irq_desc *desc);
> >  extern void handle_fasteoi_irq(struct irq_desc *desc);
> > +extern void handle_percpu_devid_fasteoi_ipi(struct irq_desc *desc);
> >  extern void handle_edge_irq(struct irq_desc *desc);
> >  extern void handle_edge_eoi_irq(struct irq_desc *desc);
> >  extern void handle_simple_irq(struct irq_desc *desc);
> > diff --git a/kernel/irq/chip.c b/kernel/irq/chip.c
> > index 41e7e37a0928..7b0b789cfed4 100644
> > --- a/kernel/irq/chip.c
> > +++ b/kernel/irq/chip.c
> > @@ -955,6 +955,32 @@ void handle_percpu_devid_irq(struct irq_desc *desc)
> >  		chip->irq_eoi(&desc->irq_data);
> >  }
> >  
> > +/**
> > + * handle_percpu_devid_fasteoi_ipi - Per CPU local IPI handler with per cpu
> > + *				     dev ids
> > + * @desc:	the interrupt description structure for this irq
> > + *
> > + * The biggest differences with the IRQ version are that:
> > + * - the interrupt is EOIed early, as the IPI could result in a context
> > + *   switch, and we need to make sure the IPI can fire again
> > + * - Stats are usually handled at the architecture level, so we ignore them
> > + *   here
> > + */
> > +void handle_percpu_devid_fasteoi_ipi(struct irq_desc *desc)
> > +{
> > +	struct irq_chip *chip = irq_desc_get_chip(desc);
> > +	struct irqaction *action = desc->action;
> > +	unsigned int irq = irq_desc_get_irq(desc);
> > +	irqreturn_t res;  
> 
> Should not this have a:
> 
> 	if (!irq_settings_is_no_accounting(desc))
> 		__kstat_incr_irqs_this_cpu(desc);
> 
> here in case you are using that handler with a SGI interrupt which is
> not used as an IPI?

I see you coming... ;-)

Yes, could do. TBH, I plan on killing the "no accounting" altogether
and move to the core IRQ one, so this would only be temporary. All I
need is to update the rest of the arm32 interrupt controllers...

Thanks,

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

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