linux-arch.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yijing Wang <wangyijing@huawei.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
	Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Paul.Mundt@huawei.com, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
	"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@parisc-linux.org>,
	virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	Xinwei Hu <huxinwei@huawei.com>,
	Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, Wuyun <wuyun.wu@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/11] Refactor MSI to support Non-PCI device
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2014 11:32:27 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53DEFECB.3030201@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201408011516.26253.arnd@arndb.de>

On 2014/8/1 21:16, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 30 July 2014, Yijing Wang wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The other part I'm not completely sure about is how you want to
>>>>> have MSIs map into normal IRQ descriptors. At the moment, all
>>>>> MSI users are based on IRQ numbers, but this has known scalability problems.
>>>>
>>>> Hmmm, I still use the IRQ number to map the MSIs to IRQ description.
>>>> I'm sorry, I don't understand you meaning.
>>>> What are the scalability problems you mentioned ?
>>> We have soft limitation of nr_irqs or hard limitation NR_IRQS,
>>> we couldn't allocate as much irq number as we need in some cases,
>>> such as to support MSI-x.
>>
>> Oh, yes, this is a potential issue. Gerry, thanks for you explanation. :)
> 
> This should no longer be an issue, as arm64 uses CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ
> and the number of interrupts is not limited in any form.
> 
> My point was more that the device driver should not need to care about
> the interrupt number: it gets made up on the spot when the MSI is
> needed, and then it is only used to request the IRQ. This can be
> simplified into one interface at the device driver level, even though
> the internal still use numbers somewhere. If we ever remove IRQ numbers
> from the driver API, this part doesn't need to get touched again.
> 

Hi Arnd, I have another question is some drivers will request more than one
MSI/MSI-X IRQ, and the driver will use them to process different things.
Eg. network driver generally uses one of them to process trivial network thins,
and others to transmit/receive data.

So, in this case, it seems to driver need to touch the IRQ numbers.

wr-linux:~ # cat /proc/interrupts
            CPU0       CPU1       CPU2     ....      CPU17      CPU18      CPU19      CPU20      CPU21      CPU22      CPU23
 ......
 100:          0          0          0               0          0          0          0          0          0          0  IR-PCI-MSI-edge      eth0
 101:          2          0          0               0          0          0  302830488          0          0          0  IR-PCI-MSI-edge      eth0-TxRx-0
 102:        110          0          0               0          0  360675897          0          0          0          0  IR-PCI-MSI-edge      eth0-TxRx-1
 103:        109          0          0               0          0          0          0          0          0          0  IR-PCI-MSI-edge      eth0-TxRx-2
 104:        107          0          0         9678933          0          0          0          0          0          0  IR-PCI-MSI-edge      eth0-TxRx-3
 105:        107          0          0               0  357838258          0          0          0          0          0  IR-PCI-MSI-edge      eth0-TxRx-4
 106:        115          0          0               0          0          0          0          0          0          0  IR-PCI-MSI-edge      eth0-TxRx-5
 107:        114          0          0               0          0          0          0  337866096          0          0  IR-PCI-MSI-edge      eth0-TxRx-6
 108:  373801199          0          0               0          0          0          0          0          0          0  IR-PCI-MSI-edge      eth0-TxRx-7

Thanks!
Yijing.

> 
> .
> 


-- 
Thanks!
Yijing

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-08-04  3:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 75+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-07-26  3:08 [RFC PATCH 00/11] Refactor MSI to support Non-PCI device Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08 ` [RFC PATCH 01/11] PCI/MSI: Use pci_dev->msi_cap instead of msi_desc->msi_attrib.pos Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08   ` Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08 ` [RFC PATCH 02/11] PCI/MSI: Use new MSI type macro instead of PCI MSI flags Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08   ` Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08 ` [RFC PATCH 03/11] PCI/MSI: Refactor pci_dev_msi_enabled() Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08   ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-05 22:35   ` Stuart Yoder
2014-08-05 22:35     ` Stuart Yoder
2014-08-06  1:23     ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-06  1:23       ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-20  5:57   ` Bharat.Bhushan
2014-08-20  5:57     ` Bharat.Bhushan
2014-08-20  6:30     ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-20  6:30       ` Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08 ` [RFC PATCH 04/11] PCI/MSI: Move MSIX table address mapping out of msix_capability_init Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08   ` Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08 ` [RFC PATCH 05/11] PCI/MSI: Move populate_msi_sysfs() out of msi_capability_init() Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08   ` Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08 ` [RFC PATCH 06/11] PCI/MSI: Save MSI irq in PCI MSI layer Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08   ` Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08 ` [RFC PATCH 07/11] PCI/MSI: Mask MSI-X entry in msix_setup_entries() Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08   ` Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08 ` [RFC PATCH 08/11] PCI/MSI: Introduce new struct msi_irqs and struct msi_ops Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08   ` Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08 ` [RFC PATCH 09/11] PCI/MSI: refactor PCI MSI driver Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08   ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-20  6:06   ` Bharat.Bhushan
2014-08-20  6:06     ` Bharat.Bhushan
2014-08-20  6:34     ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-20  6:34       ` Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08 ` [RFC PATCH 10/11] PCI/MSI: Split the generic MSI code into new file Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08   ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-20  6:18   ` Bharat.Bhushan
2014-08-20  6:18     ` Bharat.Bhushan
2014-08-20  6:43     ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-20  6:43       ` Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08 ` [RFC PATCH 11/11] x86/MSI: Refactor x86 MSI code Yijing Wang
2014-07-26  3:08   ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-20  6:20   ` Bharat.Bhushan
2014-08-20  6:20     ` Bharat.Bhushan
2014-08-20  7:01     ` Yijing Wang
2014-07-29 14:08 ` [RFC PATCH 00/11] Refactor MSI to support Non-PCI device Arnd Bergmann
2014-07-29 14:08   ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-07-30  2:45   ` Yijing Wang
2014-07-30  2:45     ` Yijing Wang
2014-07-30  6:47     ` Jiang Liu
2014-07-30  6:47       ` Jiang Liu
2014-07-30  7:20       ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-01 13:16         ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-08-01 13:16           ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-08-04  3:32           ` Yijing Wang [this message]
2014-08-04  3:32             ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-04 14:45             ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-08-05  2:20               ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-05  2:20                 ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-01 13:52     ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-08-01 13:52       ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-08-04  6:43       ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-04  6:43         ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-04 14:59         ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-08-04 14:59           ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-08-05  2:12           ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-05  2:12             ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-01 10:27 ` arnab.basu
2014-08-04  3:03   ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-04  3:03     ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-20  5:44     ` Bharat.Bhushan
2014-08-20  5:44       ` Bharat.Bhushan
2014-08-20  6:28       ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-20  6:28         ` Yijing Wang
2014-08-20  7:41         ` Bharat.Bhushan
2014-08-20  7:41           ` Bharat.Bhushan
2014-08-20  7:55           ` Yijing Wang
2014-09-03  7:15           ` Yijing Wang

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=53DEFECB.3030201@huawei.com \
    --to=wangyijing@huawei.com \
    --cc=Paul.Mundt@huawei.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
    --cc=huxinwei@huawei.com \
    --cc=jejb@parisc-linux.org \
    --cc=jiang.liu@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
    --cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=wuyun.wu@huawei.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).