From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 16/21] irqchip: Add GICv2 specific ACPI boot support
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 05:12:45 +0000
Message-ID: <20150312051245.GI21998@io.lakedaemon.net>
References: <1426077587-1561-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
 <1426077587-1561-17-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org>
 <CACxGe6uWwts6X=Yc2ioBdQizXkF1_YgoNNOsREWirk2MFBVDHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150311231141.GG21998@io.lakedaemon.net>
 <5500EFFF.2070807@huawei.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5500EFFF.2070807@huawei.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/options/linux-arm-kernel>,
 <mailto:linux-arm-kernel-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-arm-kernel-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel>,
 <mailto:linux-arm-kernel-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" <linux-arm-kernel-bounces@lists.infradead.org>
Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org
To: Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, linaro-acpi <linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com>, Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org>, ACPI Devel Mailing List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>, Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>, Robert Richter <rric@kernel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>, Jon Masters <jcm@redhat.com>, Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@linaro.org>, Ashwin Chaugule <ashwinc@codeaurora.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>, Suravee Suthikulanit <suravee.suthikulp>
List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 09:46:39AM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> On 2015/3/12 7:11, Jason Cooper wrote:
> > Hey Grant,
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 06:04:50PM +0000, Grant Likely wrote:
> >> On 11 Mar 2015 12:42, "Hanjun Guo" <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> wrote:
> >>> From: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org>
> >>>
> >>> ACPI kernel uses MADT table for proper GIC initialization. It needs to
> >>> parse GIC related subtables, collect CPU interface and distributor
> >>> addresses and call driver initialization function (which is hardware
> >>> abstraction agnostic). In a similar way, FDT initialize GICv1/2.
> >>>
> >>> NOTE: This commit allow to initialize GICv1/2 basic functionality.
> >>> While now simple GICv2 init call is used, any further GIC features
> >>> require generic infrastructure for proper ACPI irqchip initialization.
> >>> That mechanism and stacked irqdomains to support GICv2 MSI/virtualization
> >>> extension, GICv3/4 and its ITS are considered as next steps.
> >>>
> >>> CC: Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>
> >>> CC: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
> >>> CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> >> BTW, Thomas is taking a bit of a break, do he is unlikely to give an ack
> >> here in a timely manner. I've not heard from Jason. Personally, I think we
> >> can proceed without their ack if everything else is in order (heck, I used
> >> to help with the irq subsystem, use me as an ack of you want). The patch is
> >> low impact and only had effect for ARM ACPI builds.
> > I'm not talking much, but I am tracking and collecting everything for irqchip.
> > We do have some other changes in this driver this time around.  So it'd be nice
> > if I could take this.
> >
> > I had reached out to Olof for his thoughts on this and he hasn't had enough
> > cycles to look at it.  iirc, Marc reviewed a previous version and was happy with
> > the changes.  My only question I had for Olof I'll put below:
> 
> Please allow me to explain a little bit before Olof's confirmation, please don't mind if
> any offended.

I'm not sure I parse this correctly, but fwiw, I'm not easily offended.  :-)

> >>> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irqchip.c b/drivers/irqchip/irqchip.c
> >>> index 0fe2f71..afd1af3 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irqchip.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irqchip.c
> >>> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
> >>>   * warranty of any kind, whether express or implied.
> >>>   */
> >>>
> >>> +#include <linux/acpi_irq.h>
> >>>  #include <linux/init.h>
> >>>  #include <linux/of_irq.h>
> >>>  #include <linux/irqchip.h>
> >>> @@ -26,4 +27,6 @@ extern struct of_device_id __irqchip_of_table[];
> >>>  void __init irqchip_init(void)
> >>>  {
> >>>         of_irq_init(__irqchip_of_table);
> >>> +
> >>> +       acpi_irq_init();
> >>>  }
> > Is this in line with Olof's idea that providing a dtb would override ACPI?
> 
> Yes, it will. Since ACPI is default OFF (disabled), if a dtb provided, and no acpi=force
> passed in the early command line, dtb will be used as system configuration for
> boot (dtb is always the prior one for now) [1]. In acpi_gic_init() which called by
> acpi_irq_init(), it will return immediately if acpi disabled, so it will not parse
> any ACPI table for device configuration.

Ok, that matches my recollection.  Thanks for refreshing my memory.  I'll apply
this on a topic branch for irqchip/gic when I return from travel.  Most likely
Friday or over the weekend.

thx,

Jason.