From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C914C43461 for ; Sat, 5 Sep 2020 12:59:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A77A2072D for ; Sat, 5 Sep 2020 12:59:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="fi+Phoyf" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 1A77A2072D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:In-reply-to:Subject:To: From:References:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=aXAa7+66dmkoO/LXyIWNTEvpuYnUBCXbrfmGjQfI0SA=; b=fi+PhoyfSxL3+w077LuPMgpE8 jE/EBx1/f+v5QkFDtdSgSOpOTplCZemA2jvBJH9p0qRZ7IPV76bhTeWSApYEyX4nDAkYqwEx4l/7T HoDgFDSUJ1X96/f0LQ55NRC15DuXjIB6xtMxm7ANgtIX+P/7BpyNItO2Ln79WM/8khYTHg5V3djqu NY8DVNjczCJCPt0jtisGp03MYfJ6y5ew9JfGSNCQqtNv1RY1humWYi0YxWz7QZ/f89RHT6vK/oLf4 ceMAQVDzByvIpVLcyx/s4JGHwOkMruYpcX7ucGO/JjN0dAVdgDX3jUKYlQkZMTr8/DbQVGw5Sle3q xa5mPrTeQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kEXlp-0002bN-KB; Sat, 05 Sep 2020 12:58:17 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kEXlm-0002aj-5y for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Sat, 05 Sep 2020 12:58:15 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29F4DD6E; Sat, 5 Sep 2020 05:58:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e113632-lin (e113632-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.194.46]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 41F1E3F66F; Sat, 5 Sep 2020 05:58:09 -0700 (PDT) References: <20200903183206.104838-1-maz@kernel.org> <20200903183206.104838-2-maz@kernel.org> <878sdomv5i.wl-maz@kernel.org> User-agent: mu4e 0.9.17; emacs 26.3 From: Valentin Schneider To: Marc Zyngier Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] genirq: Walk the irq_data hierarchy when resending an interrupt In-reply-to: <878sdomv5i.wl-maz@kernel.org> Date: Sat, 05 Sep 2020 13:58:04 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200905_085814_280496_CEC2CAFA X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 10.82 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Thomas Gleixner , kernel-team@android.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Jason Cooper Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 05/09/20 10:26, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > Maybe considering the irqchip stack along a vertical axis is the wrong > thing to do, and that looking at it as a volume would be marginally > better? > > How about innermost (close to the CPU) vs outermost (close to the > device)? > > I guess this is fairly subjective, but the inner/outer thing does click with me. I think the "issue" with the top / bottom wording is that existing data structures (domain / irq_data hierarchy) bias my interpretation of it, but it's upside down from the irq_chip stack representation. That's not the case of inner / outer where all I can think of is the actual chip layout (i.e. as an image of the distance from the CPUs). Anyway, that's enough psychoanalysis from me, the patches look fine - I also reran my quick rtcwake test on GICv2 (tests the WAKEUP_ARMED path). Feel free to add Reviewed-by: Valentin Schneider to 1/4 & 3/4. > Thanks, > > M. _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel