[RESEND][ PATCH v3] irqchip/gicv3-its: ITS table size should not be smaller than PSZ

[RESEND][ PATCH v3] irqchip/gicv3-its: ITS table size should not be smaller than PSZ

[Stuart Yoder]

when allocating a device table, if the requested allocation
is smaller than the default granule size of the ITS
then, we need to round up to the default size

Signed-off-by: Minghuan Lian <Minghuan.Lian@freescale.com>
Signed-off-by: Stuart Yoder <stuart.yoder@freescale.com>
---
  -v3 changes
     -updated commit message and added comment
  -v3 resend-- updated email addresses sent to
  -would be nice to get this into 4.1 as the kernel will hang booting
   on some systems

 drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c | 9 ++++++++-
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
index 9687f8a..1b7e155 100644
--- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
+++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
@@ -828,7 +828,14 @@ static int its_alloc_tables(struct its_node *its)
 			u64 typer = readq_relaxed(its->base + GITS_TYPER);
 			u32 ids = GITS_TYPER_DEVBITS(typer);
 
-			order = get_order((1UL << ids) * entry_size);
+			/*
+			 * 'order' was initialized earlier to the default page
+			 * granule of the the ITS.  We can't have an allocation
+			 * smaller than that.  If the requested allocation
+			 * is smaller, round up to the default page granule.
+			 */
+			order = max(get_order((1UL << ids) * entry_size),
+				    order);
 			if (order >= MAX_ORDER) {
 				order = MAX_ORDER - 1;
 				pr_warn("%s: Device Table too large, reduce its page order to %u\n",
-- 
2.3.3

[RESEND][ PATCH v3] irqchip/gicv3-its: ITS table size should not be smaller than PSZ

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Wed, 20 May 2015, Stuart Yoder wrote:

> when allocating a device table, if the requested allocation
> is smaller than the default granule size of the ITS
> then, we need to round up to the default size
> 
> Signed-off-by: Minghuan Lian <Minghuan.Lian@freescale.com>
> Signed-off-by: Stuart Yoder <stuart.yoder@freescale.com>

So who wrote that patch? That's not a valid SOB chain ....

[RESEND][ PATCH v3] irqchip/gicv3-its: ITS table size should not be smaller than PSZ

[Stuart Yoder]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Gleixner [mailto:tglx at linutronix.de]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 2:26 PM
> To: Yoder Stuart-B08248
> Cc: marc.zyngier at arm.com; jason at lakedaemon.net; linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-
> kernel at lists.infradead.org; Lian Minghuan-B31939
> Subject: Re: [RESEND][ PATCH v3] irqchip/gicv3-its: ITS table size should not be smaller than PSZ
> 
> On Wed, 20 May 2015, Stuart Yoder wrote:
> 
> > when allocating a device table, if the requested allocation
> > is smaller than the default granule size of the ITS
> > then, we need to round up to the default size
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Minghuan Lian <Minghuan.Lian@freescale.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Stuart Yoder <stuart.yoder@freescale.com>
> 
> So who wrote that patch? That's not a valid SOB chain ....

Minghuan wrote the original patch (v1,v2), making the functional change.
I wrote/added the comments and submitted v3, after discussing with
Minghuan.

Given that, what is the correct signed-off-by chain?

Thanks,
Stuart

[RESEND][ PATCH v3] irqchip/gicv3-its: ITS table size should not be smaller than PSZ

[Jason Cooper]

Hi Stuart,

On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 07:54:57PM +0000, Stuart Yoder wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Thomas Gleixner [mailto:tglx at linutronix.de]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 2:26 PM
> > To: Yoder Stuart-B08248
> > Cc: marc.zyngier at arm.com; jason at lakedaemon.net; linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-
> > kernel at lists.infradead.org; Lian Minghuan-B31939
> > Subject: Re: [RESEND][ PATCH v3] irqchip/gicv3-its: ITS table size should not be smaller than PSZ
> > 
> > On Wed, 20 May 2015, Stuart Yoder wrote:
> > 

If this were your original email:
---------------------------------------
> > > 
> > > From: Minghuan Lian <Minghuan.Lian@freescale.com>
> > > 
> > > when allocating a device table, if the requested allocation
> > > is smaller than the default granule size of the ITS
> > > then, we need to round up to the default size
> > >
> > > [sy: Added code comments and resubmitted]
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Minghuan Lian <Minghuan.Lian@freescale.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Stuart Yoder <stuart.yoder@freescale.com>
---------------------------------------

it would have worked.

By adding a second 'From' line in the body of the message, 'git am' will put
the correct author on the commit.

> > So who wrote that patch? That's not a valid SOB chain ....
> 
> Minghuan wrote the original patch (v1,v2), making the functional change.
> I wrote/added the comments and submitted v3, after discussing with
> Minghuan.

thx,

Jason.

[RESEND][ PATCH v3] irqchip/gicv3-its: ITS table size should not be smaller than PSZ

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Wed, 20 May 2015, Stuart Yoder wrote:

> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Thomas Gleixner [mailto:tglx at linutronix.de]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 2:26 PM
> > To: Yoder Stuart-B08248
> > Cc: marc.zyngier at arm.com; jason at lakedaemon.net; linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-
> > kernel at lists.infradead.org; Lian Minghuan-B31939
> > Subject: Re: [RESEND][ PATCH v3] irqchip/gicv3-its: ITS table size should not be smaller than PSZ
> > 
> > On Wed, 20 May 2015, Stuart Yoder wrote:
> > 
> > > when allocating a device table, if the requested allocation
> > > is smaller than the default granule size of the ITS
> > > then, we need to round up to the default size
> > >
> > 
> > So who wrote that patch? That's not a valid SOB chain ....
> 
> Minghuan wrote the original patch (v1,v2), making the functional change.
> I wrote/added the comments and submitted v3, after discussing with
> Minghuan.
> 
> Given that, what is the correct signed-off-by chain?

From: Minghuan Lian <Minghuan.Lian@freescale.com>

Signed-off-by: Minghuan Lian <Minghuan.Lian@freescale.com>
[ Stuart: Added comments and massaged changelog]
Signed-off-by: Stuart Yoder <stuart.yoder@freescale.com>

So the authorship gets attributed to Minghuan and it's noticed in the
changelog that you added comments and the changelog updates and then
sent the patch.

I'll apply it with that change, ok?

Thanks,

	tglx

[RESEND][ PATCH v3] irqchip/gicv3-its: ITS table size should not be smaller than PSZ

[Stuart Yoder]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Gleixner [mailto:tglx at linutronix.de]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 3:09 PM
> To: Yoder Stuart-B08248
> Cc: marc.zyngier at arm.com; jason at lakedaemon.net; linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-
> kernel at lists.infradead.org; Lian Minghuan-B31939
> Subject: RE: [RESEND][ PATCH v3] irqchip/gicv3-its: ITS table size should not be smaller than PSZ
> 
> On Wed, 20 May 2015, Stuart Yoder wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Thomas Gleixner [mailto:tglx at linutronix.de]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 2:26 PM
> > > To: Yoder Stuart-B08248
> > > Cc: marc.zyngier at arm.com; jason at lakedaemon.net; linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-
> > > kernel at lists.infradead.org; Lian Minghuan-B31939
> > > Subject: Re: [RESEND][ PATCH v3] irqchip/gicv3-its: ITS table size should not be smaller than PSZ
> > >
> > > On Wed, 20 May 2015, Stuart Yoder wrote:
> > >
> > > > when allocating a device table, if the requested allocation
> > > > is smaller than the default granule size of the ITS
> > > > then, we need to round up to the default size
> > > >
> > >
> > > So who wrote that patch? That's not a valid SOB chain ....
> >
> > Minghuan wrote the original patch (v1,v2), making the functional change.
> > I wrote/added the comments and submitted v3, after discussing with
> > Minghuan.
> >
> > Given that, what is the correct signed-off-by chain?
> 
> From: Minghuan Lian <Minghuan.Lian@freescale.com>
> 
> Signed-off-by: Minghuan Lian <Minghuan.Lian@freescale.com>
> [ Stuart: Added comments and massaged changelog]
> Signed-off-by: Stuart Yoder <stuart.yoder@freescale.com>
> 
> So the authorship gets attributed to Minghuan and it's noticed in the
> changelog that you added comments and the changelog updates and then
> sent the patch.
> 
> I'll apply it with that change, ok?

Sure.  Thanks!

Stuart