linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc: "qizhong cheng" <qizhong.cheng@mediatek.com>,
	"Ryder Lee" <ryder.lee@mediatek.com>,
	"Jianjun Wang" <jianjun.wang@mediatek.com>,
	"Lorenzo Pieralisi" <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
	"Krzysztof Wilczyński" <kw@linux.com>,
	"Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, chuanjia.liu@mediatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: mediatek: Change MSI interrupt processing sequence
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2022 17:21:21 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e8e42eba6e7cf49bc2260f20844a7849@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220125165748.GA1458116@bhelgaas>

On 2022-01-25 16:57, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> All patches change *something*.  Can you update the subject line so it
> says something specific about the change?
> 
> Maybe something like "Clear MSI status before dispatching handler"?
> 
> On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 11:33:06AM +0800, qizhong cheng wrote:
>> As an edge-triggered interrupts, its interrupt status should be 
>> cleared
>> before dispatch to the handler of device.
> 
> I'm not an IRQ expert, but the reasoning that "we should clear the MSI
> interrupt status before dispatching the handler because MSI is an
> edge-triggered interrupt" doesn't seem completely convincing because
> your code will now look like this:
> 
>   /* Clear the INTx */
>   writel(1 << bit, port->base + PCIE_INT_STATUS);
>   generic_handle_domain_irq(port->irq_domain, bit - INTX_SHIFT);
>   ...
> 
>   /* Clear MSI interrupt status */
>   writel(MSI_STATUS, port->base + PCIE_INT_STATUS);
>   generic_handle_domain_irq(port->inner_domain, bit);
> 
> You clear interrupt status before dispatching the handler for *both*
> level-triggered INTx interrupts and edge-triggered MSI interrupts.
> 
> So it doesn't seem that simply being edge-triggered is the critical
> factor here.

This is the usual problem with these half-baked implementations.
The signalling to the primary interrupt controller is level, as
they take a multitude of input and (crucially) latch the MSI
edges. Effectively, this is an edge-to-level converter, with
all the problems that this creates.

By clearing the status *after* the handling, you lose edges that
have been received and coalesced after the read of the status
register. By clearing it *before*, you are acknowledging the
interrupts early, and allowing them to be coalesced independently
of the ones that have been received earlier.

This is however mostly an educated guess. Someone with access
to the TRM should verify this.

Thanks,

         M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2022-01-25 17:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-01-23  3:33 [PATCH] PCI: mediatek: Change MSI interrupt processing sequence qizhong cheng
2022-01-24  3:12 ` Chen-Yu Tsai
2022-01-24  6:27   ` qizhong.cheng
2022-01-24  6:55     ` Chen-Yu Tsai
2022-01-24  8:34       ` qizhong.cheng
2022-01-25 16:57 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2022-01-25 17:21   ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2022-01-26  3:37     ` qizhong.cheng
2022-01-27 21:21       ` Bjorn Helgaas
2022-01-28  7:58         ` Jianjun Wang
2022-02-08  7:08           ` qizhong.cheng
2022-01-28  8:57         ` Marc Zyngier
2022-01-28 13:12           ` Bjorn Helgaas
2022-01-28 15:09             ` Marc Zyngier

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=e8e42eba6e7cf49bc2260f20844a7849@kernel.org \
    --to=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=chuanjia.liu@mediatek.com \
    --cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=jianjun.wang@mediatek.com \
    --cc=kw@linux.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
    --cc=qizhong.cheng@mediatek.com \
    --cc=ryder.lee@mediatek.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).