From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
References: <20210111064318.6154-1-hongzhan.chen@intel.com>
 <ce919978-d926-0965-8956-37602292e12c@siemens.com>
 <87lfczk4j0.fsf@xenomai.org>
 <436b19fe-14bc-b0f3-9343-a6f52897388a@siemens.com>
From: Philippe Gerum <rpm@xenomai.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] dovetail/sirq: implement sirq request and free
 and post
In-reply-to: <436b19fe-14bc-b0f3-9343-a6f52897388a@siemens.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 14:29:11 +0100
Message-ID: <87czybk3fc.fsf@xenomai.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
List-Id: Discussions about the Xenomai project <xenomai.xenomai.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://xenomai.org/mailman/options/xenomai>,
 <mailto:xenomai-request@xenomai.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://xenomai.org/pipermail/xenomai/>
List-Post: <mailto:xenomai@xenomai.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xenomai-request@xenomai.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://xenomai.org/mailman/listinfo/xenomai>,
 <mailto:xenomai-request@xenomai.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
Cc: hongzha1 <hongzhan.chen@intel.com>, xenomai@xenomai.org


Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com> writes:

> On 11.01.21 14:05, Philippe Gerum wrote:
>> 
>> Jan Kiszka via Xenomai <xenomai@xenomai.org> writes:
>> 
>>> On 11.01.21 07:43, hongzha1 via Xenomai wrote:
>>>> inband sirq request through synthetic_irq_domain and free and post
>>>> srq.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: hongzha1 <hongzhan.chen@intel.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  .../cobalt/kernel/dovetail/pipeline/sirq.h    | 28 +++++++++++++++----
>>>>  1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/include/cobalt/kernel/dovetail/pipeline/sirq.h b/include/cobalt/kernel/dovetail/pipeline/sirq.h
>>>> index be9dc587f..1da9d13b2 100644
>>>> --- a/include/cobalt/kernel/dovetail/pipeline/sirq.h
>>>> +++ b/include/cobalt/kernel/dovetail/pipeline/sirq.h
>>>> @@ -23,9 +23,24 @@ int pipeline_create_inband_sirq(irqreturn_t (*handler)(int irq, void *dev_id))
>>>>  	 * Allocate an IRQ from the synthetic interrupt domain then
>>>>  	 * trap it to @handler, to be fired from the in-band stage.
>>>>  	 */
>>>> -	TODO();
>>>> +	int sirq, ret;
>>>>  
>>>> -	return 0;
>>>> +	sirq = irq_create_direct_mapping(synthetic_irq_domain);
>>>> +	if (sirq == 0)
>>>> +		return -EAGAIN;
>>>> +
>>>> +	ret = __request_percpu_irq(sirq,
>>>> +			handler,
>>>> +			IRQF_NO_THREAD,
>>>> +			"Inband sirq",
>>>> +			&cobalt_machine_cpudata);
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (ret) {
>>>> +		irq_dispose_mapping(sirq);
>>>> +		return ret;
>>>> +	}
>>>> +
>>>> +	return sirq;
>>>>  }
>>>>  
>>>>  static inline
>>>> @@ -35,13 +50,16 @@ void pipeline_delete_inband_sirq(int sirq)
>>>>  	 * Free the synthetic IRQ then deallocate it to its
>>>>  	 * originating domain.
>>>>  	 */
>>>> -	TODO();
>>>> +	free_percpu_irq(sirq,
>>>> +		&cobalt_machine_cpudata);
>>>> +
>>>> +	irq_dispose_mapping(sirq);
>>>>  }
>>>>  
>>>>  static inline void pipeline_post_sirq(int sirq)
>>>>  {
>>>>  	/* Trigger the synthetic IRQ */
>>>> -	TODO();
>>>> +	irq_post_inband(sirq);
>>>>  }
>>>>  
>>>> -#endif /* !_COBALT_KERNEL_IPIPE_SIRQ_H */
>>>> +#endif /* !_COBALT_KERNEL_DOVETAIL_SIRQ_H */
>>>>
>>>
>>> Does this series merely target review / discussion?
>>>
>> 
>> It is always open for discussion particularly if something needs to be
>> clarified wrt the way Dovetail works. If not, then this should be
>> considered as a merge merge request.
>> 
>
> I read "TODO", and I thought of the markers we had in wip/dovetail. So
> this series is targeting next already?
>

Yes. TODOs are being gradually fixed up by Hongzhan, whose patch series
will be following mine once I have reviewed it. Those TODOs do not
affect the behavior of I-pipe side, only the Dovetail-related section
which is WIP. This way, it is possible for me to prep the code base for
introducing Dovetail support, leaving the actual implementation to
Hongzhan, so that we can increase the bus factor by at least one
regarding this stuff.

-- 
Philippe.