* Re: [PATCH] genirq/msi: Do not use pci_msi_[un]mask_irq as default methods
2015-10-13 18:14 [PATCH] genirq/msi: Do not use pci_msi_[un]mask_irq as default methods Marc Zyngier
@ 2015-10-14 2:21 ` Jiang Liu
2015-10-15 8:40 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-10-16 12:18 ` [tip:irq/urgent] genirq/msi: Do not use pci_msi_[un] mask_irq " tip-bot for Marc Zyngier
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jiang Liu @ 2015-10-14 2:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marc Zyngier, Thomas Gleixner, Bjorn Helgaas; +Cc: linux-kernel
On 2015/10/14 2:14, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> When we create a generic MSI domain, that MSI_FLAG_USE_DEF_CHIP_OPS
> is set, and that any of .mask or .unmask are NULL in the irq_chip
> structure, we set them to pci_msi_[un]mask_irq.
>
> This is a bad idea for at least two reasons:
> - PCI_MSI might not be selected, kernel fails to build (yes, this is
> legitimate, at least on arm64!)
> - This may not be a PCI/MSI domain at all (platform MSI, for example)
>
> Either way, this looks wrong. Move the overriding of mask/unmask to
> the PCI counterpart, and panic is any of these two methods is not
> set in the core code (they really should be present).
Hi Marc,
Thanks for fixing this,
Reviewed-by: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com>
Thanks,
Gerry
>
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
> ---
> drivers/pci/msi.c | 4 ++++
> kernel/irq/msi.c | 6 +-----
> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/msi.c b/drivers/pci/msi.c
> index d449714..4a7da3c 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/msi.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/msi.c
> @@ -1243,6 +1243,10 @@ static void pci_msi_domain_update_chip_ops(struct msi_domain_info *info)
> BUG_ON(!chip);
> if (!chip->irq_write_msi_msg)
> chip->irq_write_msi_msg = pci_msi_domain_write_msg;
> + if (!chip->irq_mask)
> + chip->irq_mask = pci_msi_mask_irq;
> + if (!chip->irq_unmask)
> + chip->irq_unmask = pci_msi_unmask_irq;
> }
>
> /**
> diff --git a/kernel/irq/msi.c b/kernel/irq/msi.c
> index 7e6512b..be9149f 100644
> --- a/kernel/irq/msi.c
> +++ b/kernel/irq/msi.c
> @@ -228,11 +228,7 @@ static void msi_domain_update_chip_ops(struct msi_domain_info *info)
> {
> struct irq_chip *chip = info->chip;
>
> - BUG_ON(!chip);
> - if (!chip->irq_mask)
> - chip->irq_mask = pci_msi_mask_irq;
> - if (!chip->irq_unmask)
> - chip->irq_unmask = pci_msi_unmask_irq;
> + BUG_ON(!chip || !chip->irq_mask || !chip->irq_unmask);
> if (!chip->irq_set_affinity)
> chip->irq_set_affinity = msi_domain_set_affinity;
> }
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] genirq/msi: Do not use pci_msi_[un]mask_irq as default methods
2015-10-13 18:14 [PATCH] genirq/msi: Do not use pci_msi_[un]mask_irq as default methods Marc Zyngier
2015-10-14 2:21 ` Jiang Liu
@ 2015-10-15 8:40 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-10-16 9:53 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-10-16 12:18 ` [tip:irq/urgent] genirq/msi: Do not use pci_msi_[un] mask_irq " tip-bot for Marc Zyngier
2 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2015-10-15 8:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marc Zyngier; +Cc: Jiang Liu, Bjorn Helgaas, linux-kernel
On Tue, 13 Oct 2015, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> When we create a generic MSI domain, that MSI_FLAG_USE_DEF_CHIP_OPS
> is set, and that any of .mask or .unmask are NULL in the irq_chip
> structure, we set them to pci_msi_[un]mask_irq.
>
> This is a bad idea for at least two reasons:
> - PCI_MSI might not be selected, kernel fails to build (yes, this is
> legitimate, at least on arm64!)
> - This may not be a PCI/MSI domain at all (platform MSI, for example)
>
> Either way, this looks wrong. Move the overriding of mask/unmask to
> the PCI counterpart, and panic is any of these two methods is not
> set in the core code (they really should be present).
>
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> ---
> drivers/pci/msi.c | 4 ++++
> kernel/irq/msi.c | 6 +-----
> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/msi.c b/drivers/pci/msi.c
> index d449714..4a7da3c 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/msi.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/msi.c
> @@ -1243,6 +1243,10 @@ static void pci_msi_domain_update_chip_ops(struct msi_domain_info *info)
> BUG_ON(!chip);
> if (!chip->irq_write_msi_msg)
> chip->irq_write_msi_msg = pci_msi_domain_write_msg;
> + if (!chip->irq_mask)
> + chip->irq_mask = pci_msi_mask_irq;
> + if (!chip->irq_unmask)
> + chip->irq_unmask = pci_msi_unmask_irq;
> }
>
> /**
> diff --git a/kernel/irq/msi.c b/kernel/irq/msi.c
> index 7e6512b..be9149f 100644
> --- a/kernel/irq/msi.c
> +++ b/kernel/irq/msi.c
> @@ -228,11 +228,7 @@ static void msi_domain_update_chip_ops(struct msi_domain_info *info)
> {
> struct irq_chip *chip = info->chip;
>
> - BUG_ON(!chip);
> - if (!chip->irq_mask)
> - chip->irq_mask = pci_msi_mask_irq;
> - if (!chip->irq_unmask)
> - chip->irq_unmask = pci_msi_unmask_irq;
> + BUG_ON(!chip || !chip->irq_mask || !chip->irq_unmask);
> if (!chip->irq_set_affinity)
> chip->irq_set_affinity = msi_domain_set_affinity;
> }
> --
> 2.1.4
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] genirq/msi: Do not use pci_msi_[un]mask_irq as default methods
2015-10-15 8:40 ` Thomas Gleixner
@ 2015-10-16 9:53 ` Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2015-10-16 9:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marc Zyngier; +Cc: Jiang Liu, Bjorn Helgaas, linux-kernel
Bjorn,
On Thu, 15 Oct 2015, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Oct 2015, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>
> > When we create a generic MSI domain, that MSI_FLAG_USE_DEF_CHIP_OPS
> > is set, and that any of .mask or .unmask are NULL in the irq_chip
> > structure, we set them to pci_msi_[un]mask_irq.
> >
> > This is a bad idea for at least two reasons:
> > - PCI_MSI might not be selected, kernel fails to build (yes, this is
> > legitimate, at least on arm64!)
> > - This may not be a PCI/MSI domain at all (platform MSI, for example)
> >
> > Either way, this looks wrong. Move the overriding of mask/unmask to
> > the PCI counterpart, and panic is any of these two methods is not
> > set in the core code (they really should be present).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
Should I take that one?
Thanks,
tglx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [tip:irq/urgent] genirq/msi: Do not use pci_msi_[un] mask_irq as default methods
2015-10-13 18:14 [PATCH] genirq/msi: Do not use pci_msi_[un]mask_irq as default methods Marc Zyngier
2015-10-14 2:21 ` Jiang Liu
2015-10-15 8:40 ` Thomas Gleixner
@ 2015-10-16 12:18 ` tip-bot for Marc Zyngier
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: tip-bot for Marc Zyngier @ 2015-10-16 12:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-tip-commits
Cc: marc.zyngier, jiang.liu, mingo, tglx, linux-kernel, bhelgaas, hpa
Commit-ID: 0701c53e460ea64daf0ee789d0b08fef57800016
Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/0701c53e460ea64daf0ee789d0b08fef57800016
Author: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
AuthorDate: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 19:14:45 +0100
Committer: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
CommitDate: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 12:40:43 +0200
genirq/msi: Do not use pci_msi_[un]mask_irq as default methods
When we create a generic MSI domain, that MSI_FLAG_USE_DEF_CHIP_OPS
is set, and that any of .mask or .unmask are NULL in the irq_chip
structure, we set them to pci_msi_[un]mask_irq.
This is a bad idea for at least two reasons:
- PCI_MSI might not be selected, kernel fails to build (yes, this is
legitimate, at least on arm64!)
- This may not be a PCI/MSI domain at all (platform MSI, for example)
Either way, this looks wrong. Move the overriding of mask/unmask to
the PCI counterpart, and panic is any of these two methods is not
set in the core code (they really should be present).
Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
Cc: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1444760085-27857-1-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
drivers/pci/msi.c | 4 ++++
kernel/irq/msi.c | 6 +-----
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/pci/msi.c b/drivers/pci/msi.c
index d449714..4a7da3c 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/msi.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/msi.c
@@ -1243,6 +1243,10 @@ static void pci_msi_domain_update_chip_ops(struct msi_domain_info *info)
BUG_ON(!chip);
if (!chip->irq_write_msi_msg)
chip->irq_write_msi_msg = pci_msi_domain_write_msg;
+ if (!chip->irq_mask)
+ chip->irq_mask = pci_msi_mask_irq;
+ if (!chip->irq_unmask)
+ chip->irq_unmask = pci_msi_unmask_irq;
}
/**
diff --git a/kernel/irq/msi.c b/kernel/irq/msi.c
index 7e6512b..be9149f 100644
--- a/kernel/irq/msi.c
+++ b/kernel/irq/msi.c
@@ -228,11 +228,7 @@ static void msi_domain_update_chip_ops(struct msi_domain_info *info)
{
struct irq_chip *chip = info->chip;
- BUG_ON(!chip);
- if (!chip->irq_mask)
- chip->irq_mask = pci_msi_mask_irq;
- if (!chip->irq_unmask)
- chip->irq_unmask = pci_msi_unmask_irq;
+ BUG_ON(!chip || !chip->irq_mask || !chip->irq_unmask);
if (!chip->irq_set_affinity)
chip->irq_set_affinity = msi_domain_set_affinity;
}
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread