From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
To: Eddie Dawydiuk <eddie@embeddedarm.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: FPGA IRQ design question
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 08:57:37 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fa686aa40904220757u1bcf1693oc2329c67209249ac@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49EF2E82.9080905@embeddedarm.com>
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Eddie Dawydiuk <eddie@embeddedarm.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm working on a board based on the Yosemite AMCC 440EP. We have an FPGA
> connected via the PCI bus, and has an IRQ line connected directly to the
> 440EP. The FPGA implements two registers to indicate which core generated
> the interrupt. So now the question is from a design standpoint is it
> preferable to setup the IRQ as a single external IRQ then have each driver
> request this same IRQ. In each ISR the driver is responsible for checking
> the FPGA registers to see if the interrupt is intended for itself. Or would
> it be preferable to modify the lower level irq routines such that multiple
> software/virtual(not sure what the right term is here) irqs are created
> corresponding to the single external IRQ. Then abstract the details of the
> FPGA interrupt registers from each driver. Such that each driver request the
> proper software/virtual IRQ and requires no knowledge of the fpga irq
> registers. Any comments would be appreciated.
Both approaches are valid and you can use your judgment here, but here
are some suggestions:
If the IRQs need to be explicity acked in the FPGA iq controller, then
I'd probably write a cascaded irq driver. Or, if you will be using
existing device drivers, then I would also probably do a cascaded
driver.
However, if you're writing one-off custom drivers and there is no
common coded needed for acking irqs, then I would probably just use
the external IRQ.
g.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-22 14:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-22 14:49 FPGA IRQ design question Eddie Dawydiuk
2009-04-22 14:57 ` Grant Likely [this message]
2009-04-22 18:05 ` Eddie Dawydiuk
2009-04-22 18:07 ` Wolfgang Grandegger
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=fa686aa40904220757u1bcf1693oc2329c67209249ac@mail.gmail.com \
--to=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=eddie@embeddedarm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.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).