linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: hzpeterchen@gmail.com (Peter Chen)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] irqchip: irq-gic: forward SGI to itself for cortex-a7 single core
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 11:46:13 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160809034613.GB31105@shlinux2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160808145916.0924e868@arm.com>

On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 02:59:16PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Aug 2016 14:48:42 +0100
> Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 09:28:47PM +0800, Peter Chen wrote:
> > > On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 02:07:54PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:  
> > > > I see that for arm64 we have:
> > > > 
> > > > static inline bool arch_irq_work_has_interrupt(void)
> > > > {
> > > > 	return !!__smp_cross_call;
> > > > }
> > > > 
> > > > Could we do similarly for ARM, and ony register gic_raise_softirq if
> > > > we have non-zero SGI targets?
> > > > 
> > > > If I've understood correctly, that would make things behave as they do
> > > > for UP on you system.  
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > > If self-IPI is necessary, then this would be up to the GIC code to
> > > > solve.
> > > > 
> > > > For that case, it would be nicer if we could detect whether this was
> > > > necessary based on the GIC registers alone. That way we handle the
> > > > various ways this can be integrated, aren't totally relient on the DT,
> > > > work in VMs, etc.  
> > > 
> > > How we can detect IPI capabilities based on GIC register?  
> > 
> > Check the mask associated with SGIs, as we do for gic_get_cpumask(). If
> > this is zero, we have a non-multiprocessor GIC (or one that's otherwise
> > broken), and can't do SGI in the usual way.
> > 
> > However, it only makes sense to do this if self-IPI is truly a
> > necessity. Given there are other interrupt controllers that can't do
> > self-IPI, avoiding self-IPI in general would be a better strategy,
> > avoiding churn in each and every driver...
> 
> Indeed. And I won't take such a patch until all other avenues have been
> explored, including fixing core code if required...
> 

Ok, it seems both you and Mark agree with disable IPI for GIC who has only
self-IPI capability (GICD_ITARGETSR0 to GICD_ITARGETSR7 are all zero), right?

But even we do that, we still have problem that the callers for
smp_cross_call don't know well if the platform has IPI capability. Eg,
IRQ work considers the SMP system has IPI capability, but it is not a
must in this case (Cortex-A7 MPcore version, but cpu number is one).
It will cause NULL pointer dereference problem as __smp_cross_call is
NULL, and we need to make below change to let it work:

diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/smp.c b/arch/arm/kernel/smp.c
index 937c892..276bd94 100644
--- a/arch/arm/kernel/smp.c
+++ b/arch/arm/kernel/smp.c
@@ -487,7 +487,8 @@ static const char *ipi_types[NR_IPI] __tracepoint_string = {
 static void smp_cross_call(const struct cpumask *target, unsigned int ipinr)
 {
 	trace_ipi_raise_rcuidle(target, ipi_types[ipinr]);
-	__smp_cross_call(target, ipinr);
+	if (__smp_cross_call)
+		__smp_cross_call(target, ipinr);
 }

-- 

Best Regards,
Peter Chen

  reply	other threads:[~2016-08-09  3:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-08-08  7:49 [PATCH 1/1] irqchip: irq-gic: forward SGI to itself for cortex-a7 single core Peter Chen
2016-08-08 10:50 ` Mark Rutland
2016-08-08 12:00   ` Peter Chen
2016-08-08 13:07     ` Mark Rutland
2016-08-08 13:28       ` Peter Chen
2016-08-08 13:48         ` Mark Rutland
2016-08-08 13:59           ` Marc Zyngier
2016-08-09  3:46             ` Peter Chen [this message]
2016-08-09  5:34               ` Marc Zyngier
2016-08-09  5:57                 ` Peter Chen
2016-08-09  6:59                   ` Marc Zyngier
2016-08-09  7:18                     ` Peter Chen
2016-08-09  8:54                       ` Marc Zyngier
2016-08-09  9:39                         ` Peter Chen
2016-08-09 10:08                           ` Marc Zyngier
2016-08-09 11:50                             ` Peter Chen
2016-08-09 13:03                         ` Fabio Estevam
2016-08-16 16:29                         ` Fabio Estevam
2016-08-16 16:48                           ` Marc Zyngier
2016-08-16 17:03                             ` Fabio Estevam
2016-08-16 18:09                               ` Fabio Estevam
2016-08-09  9:30   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-08-08 13:39 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-08-09  3:16   ` Peter Chen

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=20160809034613.GB31105@shlinux2 \
    --to=hzpeterchen@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /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).