From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pl1-f179.google.com (mail-pl1-f179.google.com [209.85.214.179]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A599B17552 for ; Mon, 27 May 2024 04:39:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.179 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716784781; cv=none; b=YOCID6+ZJnVOd/X5/bbmZK8AB6LK3qWElcfjNNbeIE2D0l2sRSyTbqv/cTTkrEllkYfQrLg5DtqvAnXu1/HqZq4MlaoZ1J4cHz2hnZrGCzdC3FvDZu6wqOJftIKik2eHIZP15f8OopaSb4Ffuuc1P/V9U5L9je5+xEqQV1H6Vmc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716784781; c=relaxed/simple; bh=oJwR3+2YrVRYYhvFhHEyHQNfR5yttFLneZk6S+2cBpE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=PL6IKMfHvw56sg8PcbD5XynlWI5vBj7K3cOTJirM2K6m1c1VyPry6vjggir7p+DQSEKRjAst4NkfzzEhSBGSQfkw24nVoFpW8yRQSyT8f+eetkWnMHasRLqA042fbXHorpUJIgj2FYGpIwpqspNcfzSscqSByOrT3sIFNT1zwG8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ventanamicro.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ventanamicro.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ventanamicro.com header.i=@ventanamicro.com header.b=SH0R+ZAj; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.179 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ventanamicro.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ventanamicro.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ventanamicro.com header.i=@ventanamicro.com header.b="SH0R+ZAj" Received: by mail-pl1-f179.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1f47eb2354bso5927005ad.3 for ; Sun, 26 May 2024 21:39:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ventanamicro.com; s=google; t=1716784779; x=1717389579; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=+6YXrviCLcyxXmmDXMgEBXPU7+X84327YvIUqwBQ/Tg=; b=SH0R+ZAjcKQ0KsfjWdaSY/8DOKCSDQJIetvy6HmxkhcMY6EbsaOgR5uREaaae6AI3L X6BIJHIrVnolNVzLCUO0NP1mfLlAoT3JVgpCWFIHUKTfTdGEdV3x1juac4TCdLcr7KjD qhuhjyyKgUO0ld2m2NUaOI1U4jNu9UE0ISBvh55av3XyOf0XUmExtQ3tRQBhxo3f0JyM UE5mrYAn5Jrc1HweV71Xw43VaJFMl3oB6XG+gl86bD/VTJ2kzV9YBzOc7lDmU+OelLMN /6Y7Et1ZNZ8pfYuWCGGZwcFZuYzHHxcX2KTsu8rwrDBzazOXVf43SdmBI0/XINBhso26 p/Og== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1716784779; x=1717389579; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=+6YXrviCLcyxXmmDXMgEBXPU7+X84327YvIUqwBQ/Tg=; b=LxQHCzYefz5rUhjiN9ZGOJ+o/QoKcgJyeM8W0RMZM7Yx8gQfUSqZsksEJQby4/TX4i Wpu8y3nyE/aHNNLem8L5RKqqo32Hix0d9qqsinNpZ+tUju/ymxgTgcXZmflS0VzO52b7 T7VkmUCCNRNQXdIu65SS7bmCHzi7RpC8z6pyR4UVm4V4uihVYcip6+7nolD5ngoxiW77 guqYQLR5JFHUdqKDkZ25BfA7Ocl18D7jsmuvRWldjE1CgJRkm2+OkJxOk/6JyJQvU9L+ lhL/qsSqJfk4gqu29sSuRHtI0vzzXVcPqZg2sMaiBNpp72xOM4iLA0uU0Ks4vdh5Jb1N rEMw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWqxtl8r2V0VlvAu2hO0eSRUFWZdZFBu7x/uWxAKBTg2SWYCuyqJr/LSuaNGhLl/hhXks7R8aGE1wqJyytdf1rI3yVj0iE2BK+zew== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YysCCBoGRl0MkehtEPrsEtpEAv1N/JYtpKx5pCEVYiz9QyophzQ GH4YOCGKBBtF6+zjZ26l2fuatSdbv45P8EpIiXjzm+gjtyW0qEPB7Sfft8xzax8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IE9JvCAMKXsid9Oup9PtkMG3gbKLCIeVIPVgCCtq14j1hr2UK2tj9TrDVbVzYBOJhbbgWrYoQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:188:b0:1f3:900:8f83 with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1f4498ec4ecmr99852385ad.52.1716784778805; Sun, 26 May 2024 21:39:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sunil-laptop ([106.51.188.31]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d9443c01a7336-1f44c9903b5sm50879945ad.189.2024.05.26.21.39.29 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 26 May 2024 21:39:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 27 May 2024 10:09:26 +0530 From: Sunil V L To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, acpica-devel@lists.linux.dev, Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Paul Walmsley , Albert Ou , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Len Brown , Bjorn Helgaas , Anup Patel , Samuel Holland , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jiri Slaby , Robert Moore , Conor Dooley , Andrew Jones , Andy Shevchenko , Marc Zyngier , Atish Kumar Patra , Andrei Warkentin , Haibo1 Xu , =?utf-8?B?QmrDtnJuIFTDtnBlbA==?= Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 13/17] irqchip/riscv-intc: Add ACPI support for AIA Message-ID: References: <20240501121742.1215792-1-sunilvl@ventanamicro.com> <20240501121742.1215792-14-sunilvl@ventanamicro.com> <874jaofbfp.ffs@tglx> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <874jaofbfp.ffs@tglx> Hi Thomas, On Thu, May 23, 2024 at 11:47:06PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Wed, May 01 2024 at 17:47, Sunil V L wrote: > > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-intc.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-intc.c > > index 9e71c4428814..af7a2f78f0ee 100644 > > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-intc.c > > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-riscv-intc.c > > @@ -249,14 +249,105 @@ IRQCHIP_DECLARE(riscv, "riscv,cpu-intc", riscv_intc_init); > > IRQCHIP_DECLARE(andes, "andestech,cpu-intc", riscv_intc_init); > > > > #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI > > +struct rintc_data { > > + u32 ext_intc_id; > > + unsigned long hart_id; > > + u64 imsic_addr; > > + u32 imsic_size; > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/maintainer-tip.html#struct-declarations-and-initializers > Sure, thanks! > > +}; > > + > > +static u32 nr_rintc; > > +static struct rintc_data *rintc_acpi_data[NR_CPUS]; > > + > > +int acpi_get_intc_index_hartid(u32 index, unsigned long *hartid) > > Why int? All of these functions have strictly boolean return values: > success = true, fail = false, no? > > Either bool or get rid of the pointer and let the function return > either the real hart id or an invalid one. > Sure. I just tried to keep it similar to the parent function. But let me go with your suggestion in the next revision. > > +{ > > + if (index >= nr_rintc) > > + return -1; > > + > > + *hartid = rintc_acpi_data[index]->hart_id; > > + return 0; > > I.e. > > return index >= nr_rintc ? rintc_acpi_data[index]->hart_id : INVALID_HART_ID; > Sure. > > +int acpi_get_ext_intc_parent_hartid(u8 id, u32 idx, unsigned long *hartid) > > +{ > > + int i, j = 0; > > + > > + for (i = 0; i < nr_rintc; i++) { > > + if (APLIC_PLIC_ID(rintc_acpi_data[i]->ext_intc_id) == id) { > > + if (idx == j) { > > + *hartid = rintc_acpi_data[i]->hart_id; > > + return 0; > > + } > > + j++; > > + } > > + } > > + > > + return -1; > > +} > > + > > +void acpi_get_plic_nr_contexts(u8 id, int *nr_contexts) > > +{ > > + int i, j = 0; > > + > > + for (i = 0; i < nr_rintc; i++) { > > + if (APLIC_PLIC_ID(rintc_acpi_data[i]->ext_intc_id) == id) > > + j++; > > + } > > + > > + *nr_contexts = j; > > +} > > + > > +int acpi_get_plic_context(u8 id, u32 idx, int *context_id) > > +{ > > + int i, j = 0; > > + > > + for (i = 0; i < nr_rintc; i++) { > > + if (APLIC_PLIC_ID(rintc_acpi_data[i]->ext_intc_id) == id) { > > + if (idx == j) { > > + *context_id = IDC_CONTEXT_ID(rintc_acpi_data[i]->ext_intc_id); > > + return 0; > > + } > > + > > + j++; > > + } > > + } > > So that's the third incarnation of the same loop with the truly self > explaining variable and argument names. > > j is actually the index of the context which is associated to a > given PLIC ID. > > idx is the context index to search for > > Right? So why can't these things be named in a way which makes the > intent of the code clear? > > Also why are all the arguments u8/u32? There is no hardware > involved. Simple 'unsigned int' is just fine and the u8/u32 is not bying > you anything here. > > Aside of that these ugly macros can be completely avoided and the code > can be written without a copy & pasta orgy. > > struct rintc_data { > union { > u32 ext_intc_id; > struct { > u32 context_id : 16, > : 8, > aplic_plic_id : 8; > } > }; > unsigned long hart_id; > u64 imsic_addr; > u32 imsic_size; > }; > > #define for_each_matching_plic(_plic, _plic_id) \ > for (_plic = 0; _plic < nr_rintc; _plict++) \ > if (rintc_acpi_data[_plic]->aplic_plic_id != _plic_id) \ > continue; \ > else > > unsigned int acpi_get_plic_nr_contexts(unsigned int plic_id) > { > unsigned int nctx = 0; > > for_each_matching_plic(plic, plic_id) > nctx++; > > return nctx; > } > > static struct rintc_data *get_plic_context(unsigned int plic_id, unsigned int ctxt_idx) > { > unsigned int ctxt = 0; > > for_each_matching_plic(plic, plic_id) { > if (ctxt == ctxt_idx) > return rintc_acpi_data + plic; > } > return NULL; > } > > unsigned long acpi_get_ext_intc_parent_hartid(unsigned int plic_id, unsigned int ctxt_idx) > { > struct rintc_data *data = get_plic_context(plic_id, ctxt_idx); > > return data ? data->hart_id : INVALID_HART_ID; > } > > unsigned int acpi_get_plic_context(unsigned int plic_id, unsigned int ctxt_idx) > { > struct rintc_data *data = get_plic_context(plic_id, ctxt_idx); > > return data ? data->context_id : INVALID_CONTEXT; > } > > Or something like that. Hmm? > Nice!. Yes, this is better. Thanks a lot for the suggestion. Let me update in the next revision. > > +int acpi_get_imsic_mmio_info(u32 index, struct resource *res) > > +{ > > + if (index >= nr_rintc) > > + return -1; > > + > > + res->start = rintc_acpi_data[index]->imsic_addr; > > + res->end = res->start + rintc_acpi_data[index]->imsic_size - 1; > > + res->flags = IORESOURCE_MEM; > > + return 0; > > +} > > + > > +static struct fwnode_handle *ext_entc_get_gsi_domain_id(u32 gsi) > > +{ > > + return riscv_acpi_get_gsi_domain_id(gsi); > > +} > > This wrapper is required because using riscv_acpi_get_gsi_domain_id() > directly is too obvious, right? > :-). Let me remove it. > > static int __init riscv_intc_acpi_init(union acpi_subtable_headers *header, > > const unsigned long end) > > { > > - struct fwnode_handle *fn; > > struct acpi_madt_rintc *rintc; > > + struct fwnode_handle *fn; > > + int rc; > > > > rintc = (struct acpi_madt_rintc *)header; > > + rintc_acpi_data[nr_rintc] = kzalloc(sizeof(*rintc_acpi_data[0]), GFP_KERNEL); > > + if (!rintc_acpi_data[nr_rintc]) > > + return -ENOMEM; > > + > > + rintc_acpi_data[nr_rintc]->ext_intc_id = rintc->ext_intc_id; > > + rintc_acpi_data[nr_rintc]->hart_id = rintc->hart_id; > > + rintc_acpi_data[nr_rintc]->imsic_addr = rintc->imsic_addr; > > + rintc_acpi_data[nr_rintc]->imsic_size = rintc->imsic_size; > > + nr_rintc++; > > > > /* > > * The ACPI MADT will have one INTC for each CPU (or HART) > > @@ -273,7 +364,14 @@ static int __init riscv_intc_acpi_init(union acpi_subtable_headers *header, > > return -ENOMEM; > > } > > > > - return riscv_intc_init_common(fn, &riscv_intc_chip); > > + rc = riscv_intc_init_common(fn, &riscv_intc_chip); > > + if (rc) { > > + irq_domain_free_fwnode(fn); > > + return rc; > > + } > > This looks like a completely unrelated bug fix. Please don't mix functional > changes and fixes. > Makes sense. Let me create separate patch. Thanks a lot for the review! Sunil