From: robherring2@gmail.com (Rob Herring)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: GIC: dont warn on pre-allocated IRQ descs
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 16:55:56 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5062286C.2080907@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACRpkdbJ828orOkXUnjuJh1iHA8Fe3AuuQRiQiYt0XFuvsWO=w@mail.gmail.com>
On 09/25/2012 03:08 PM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 9:28 PM, Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 09/25/2012 02:19 PM, Linus Walleij wrote:
>
>>> The allocation will succeed if the platform define .nr_irqs
>>> to 0 as an ideal device tree platform would do, but I think it
>>> is a bit thick to require that every platform that wants to
>>> use sparse IRQs must first or simultaneously switch to
>>> device tree. So make this to a simple pr_debug().
>>
>> It's not a matter of switching to DT or not. It is a matter of whether
>> an irq_chip allocates it's descriptors or not either directly or
>> indirectly via irqdomain.
>
> Yeah OK that's true.
>
>> The gic does this, so it is secondary
>> controllers which are the problem. A platform could allocate the ranges
>> needed for those controllers and leave a hole for the gic to allocate.
>>
>> A prefer to leave this so platforms get fixed.
>
> Since the core kernel will allocate .nr_irqs on boot I guess
> this means you have to define the machine's .nr_irqs to
> zero or atleast < 16 so it doesn't overlap with those the
> GIC wants to use.
I believe the default of 0 causes NR_IRQS_LEGACY to be used which is
what we want.
> So I'll try that, and ad-hoc allocate descriptors needed
> above that range for drivers that are not yet allocating
> their descriptors ...
>
> One question though: the real fix is obviously for all
> drivers exposing an irqchip to allocate its descriptors
> dynamically with exlicit alloc_descs() or using the
> linear irq domain instead of relying on pre-allocated
> descriptors.
>
> Should we patch all drivers to spit out similar warnings
> then?
If you are bored with nothing else to do... Might as well fix them if
you can find them all.
Of course if you follow my previous suggestion, that would be a red flag
that you aren't fixing the irq_chip and we should reject the change. :)
Rob
>
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-25 21:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-25 19:19 [PATCH] ARM: GIC: dont warn on pre-allocated IRQ descs Linus Walleij
2012-09-25 19:28 ` Rob Herring
2012-09-25 20:08 ` Linus Walleij
2012-09-25 21:55 ` Rob Herring [this message]
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=5062286C.2080907@gmail.com \
--to=robherring2@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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.