public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marcelo Schmitt <marcelo.schmitt1@gmail.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, lars@metafoo.de
Subject: [RFC] genirq: prevent allocated_irqs from being smaller than NR_IRQS
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2020 12:08:20 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200402150820.GB5886@smtp.gmail.com> (raw)

Hi,

I was trying to understand IRQ initialization when suddenly got
intrigued about the declaration of the "allocated_irqs" bitmap at
kernel/irq/irqdesc.c. The size of allocated_irqs is defined by
IRQ_BITMAP_BITS, which in turn is passed to BITS_TO_LONGS to calculate
the actual number of IRQs the system may have. If I got it right, there
should be one entry at allocated_irqs for each possible IRQ line. At
kernel/irq/internals.h, IRQ_BITMAP_BITS is defined to be NR_IRQS (or
NR_IRQS plus a high constant in the case of sparse IRQs), which most
architectures seem to define as being the actual number of IRQs a board
has.

#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ
# define IRQ_BITMAP_BITS (NR_IRQS + 8196)
#else
# define IRQ_BITMAP_BITS NR_IRQS
#endif

The thing I'm troubled about is that BITS_TO_LONGS divides
IRQ_BITMAP_BITS by sizeof(long) * 8, which makes it possible for the
size of allocated_irqs to be smaller than NR_IRQS.

For instance, if !CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ, sizeof(long) == 8, and NR_IRQS is
defined as 16, then IRQ_BITMAP_BITS would be equal to 
(16 + 64 - 1)/64 = 1. Even if CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ is defined, a device
with a large number of IRQ lines would end up with a small bitmap for
allocated_irqs.

I thought NR_IRQS would be multiplied by the number of bits it uses.
Something like:

#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ
# define IRQ_BITMAP_BITS (NR_IRQS * BITS_PER_TYPE(long) + 8196)
#else
# define IRQ_BITMAP_BITS (NR_IRQS * BITS_PER_TYPE(long))
#endif

Anyhow, IRQ_BITMAP_BITS is also used to limit the maximum number of IRQs
at irqdesc.c. If my understanding of nr_irqs is correct, it would make
sense to change some sanity checks at early_irq_init() too.

Does anyone mind giving me some advice on how allocated_irqs is
initialized with a suitable size to support the number of interrupt
lines a board may have?

By the way, is there any mailing list for IRQ related discussions?
I couldn't find one at vger.kernel.org.


Thanks,

Marcelo

             reply	other threads:[~2020-04-02 15:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-04-02 15:08 Marcelo Schmitt [this message]
2020-04-02 15:16 ` [RFC] genirq: prevent allocated_irqs from being smaller than NR_IRQS Lars-Peter Clausen
2020-04-02 17:25   ` Marcelo Schmitt
2020-04-02 19:17 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-04-02 23:23   ` Marcelo Schmitt

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=20200402150820.GB5886@smtp.gmail.com \
    --to=marcelo.schmitt1@gmail.com \
    --cc=lars@metafoo.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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