From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: eric.auger@linaro.org (Eric Auger) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 11:42:50 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 3/6] irqchip: GICv3: Skip LPI deactivation In-Reply-To: <1436447951-22357-4-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> References: <1436447951-22357-1-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> <1436447951-22357-4-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> Message-ID: <55C9C39A.3060208@linaro.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 07/09/2015 03:19 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote: > Contrary to other GICv3 interrupts, LPIs do not have an active state > by virtue of being edge-triggered only (they only have a pending state). > > Given this, there is no point trying to deactivate them, and we can > skip the ICC_DIR_EL1 entierely. > > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier > --- > drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c | 8 ++++++-- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c > index 49768fc..e02592b 100644 > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c > @@ -295,10 +295,14 @@ static int gic_irq_get_irqchip_state(struct irq_data *d, > > static void gic_eoi_irq(struct irq_data *d) > { > - if (static_key_true(&supports_deactivate)) > + if (static_key_true(&supports_deactivate)) { > + /* No need to deactivate an LPI */ > + if (gic_irq(d) >= 8192) In case of EOIMode == 0, we do not call EOI. I can't understand whether it is an issue. In 4.8.3 Properties of LPI, in 2d note it is written: "SW must issue a write to EOI to clear the active priorities register, hence the CPU interface still requires an active state for LPIs, even through this is not necessary within the redistributor" Eric > + return; > gic_write_dir(gic_irq(d)); > - else > + } else { > gic_write_eoir(gic_irq(d)); > + } > } > > static int gic_set_type(struct irq_data *d, unsigned int type) >