Re: [tip: irq/core] irqchip/xilinx: Enable generic irq multi handler

Michal Simek
2020-03-30T09:04:08Z

On 30. 03. 20 10:45, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 2020-03-30 09:32, Michal Simek wrote:
>> Hi Thomas and Marc,
>>
>> On 29. 03. 20 22:26, tip-bot2 for Michal Simek wrote:
>>> The following commit has been merged into the irq/core branch of tip:
>>>
>>> Commit-ID:     a0789993bf8266e62fea6b4613945ba081c71e7d
>>> Gitweb:
>>> https://git.kernel.org/tip/a0789993bf8266e62fea6b4613945ba081c71e7d
>>> Author:        Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>
>>> AuthorDate:    Tue, 17 Mar 2020 18:25:59 +05:30
>>> Committer:     Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
>>> CommitterDate: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 11:52:53
>>>
>>> irqchip/xilinx: Enable generic irq multi handler
>>>
>>> Register default arch handler via driver instead of directly pointing to
>>> xilinx intc controller. This patch makes architecture code more generic.
>>>
>>> Driver calls generic domain specific irq handler which does the most of
>>> things self. Also get rid of concurrent_irq counting which hasn't been
>>> exported anywhere.
>>> Based on this loop was also optimized by using do/while loop instead of
>>> goto loop.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
>>> Reviewed-by: Stefan Asserhall <stefan.asserhall@xilinx.com>
>>> Link:
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200317125600.15913-4-mubin.usman.sayyed@xilinx.com
>>>
>>> ---
>>>  arch/microblaze/Kconfig           |  2 ++-
>>>  arch/microblaze/include/asm/irq.h |  3 +---
>>>  arch/microblaze/kernel/irq.c      | 21 +-------------------
>>>  drivers/irqchip/irq-xilinx-intc.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++-------------
>>>  4 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/microblaze/Kconfig b/arch/microblaze/Kconfig
>>> index 6a331bd..242f58e 100644
>>> --- a/arch/microblaze/Kconfig
>>> +++ b/arch/microblaze/Kconfig
>>> @@ -47,6 +47,8 @@ config MICROBLAZE
>>>      select CPU_NO_EFFICIENT_FFS
>>>      select MMU_GATHER_NO_RANGE if MMU
>>>      select SPARSE_IRQ
>>> +    select GENERIC_IRQ_MULTI_HANDLER
>>> +    select HANDLE_DOMAIN_IRQ
>>>
>>>  # Endianness selection
>>>  choice
>>> diff --git a/arch/microblaze/include/asm/irq.h
>>> b/arch/microblaze/include/asm/irq.h
>>> index eac2fb4..5166f08 100644
>>> --- a/arch/microblaze/include/asm/irq.h
>>> +++ b/arch/microblaze/include/asm/irq.h
>>> @@ -14,7 +14,4 @@
>>>  struct pt_regs;
>>>  extern void do_IRQ(struct pt_regs *regs);
>>>
>>> -/* should be defined in each interrupt controller driver */
>>> -extern unsigned int xintc_get_irq(void);
>>> -
>>>  #endif /* _ASM_MICROBLAZE_IRQ_H */
>>> diff --git a/arch/microblaze/kernel/irq.c b/arch/microblaze/kernel/irq.c
>>> index 903dad8..0b37dde 100644
>>> --- a/arch/microblaze/kernel/irq.c
>>> +++ b/arch/microblaze/kernel/irq.c
>>> @@ -20,29 +20,10 @@
>>>  #include <linux/irqchip.h>
>>>  #include <linux/of_irq.h>
>>>
>>> -static u32 concurrent_irq;
>>> -
>>>  void __irq_entry do_IRQ(struct pt_regs *regs)
>>>  {
>>> -    unsigned int irq;
>>> -    struct pt_regs *old_regs = set_irq_regs(regs);
>>>      trace_hardirqs_off();
>>> -
>>> -    irq_enter();
>>> -    irq = xintc_get_irq();
>>> -next_irq:
>>> -    BUG_ON(!irq);
>>> -    generic_handle_irq(irq);
>>> -
>>> -    irq = xintc_get_irq();
>>> -    if (irq != -1U) {
>>> -        pr_debug("next irq: %d\n", irq);
>>> -        ++concurrent_irq;
>>> -        goto next_irq;
>>> -    }
>>> -
>>> -    irq_exit();
>>> -    set_irq_regs(old_regs);
>>> +    handle_arch_irq(regs);
>>>      trace_hardirqs_on();
>>>  }
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-xilinx-intc.c
>>> b/drivers/irqchip/irq-xilinx-intc.c
>>> index 1d3d273..ea74181 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-xilinx-intc.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-xilinx-intc.c
>>> @@ -124,20 +124,6 @@ static unsigned int xintc_get_irq_local(struct
>>> xintc_irq_chip *irqc)
>>>      return irq;
>>>  }
>>>
>>> -unsigned int xintc_get_irq(void)
>>> -{
>>> -    unsigned int irq = -1;
>>> -    u32 hwirq;
>>> -
>>> -    hwirq = xintc_read(primary_intc, IVR);
>>> -    if (hwirq != -1U)
>>> -        irq = irq_find_mapping(primary_intc->root_domain, hwirq);
>>> -
>>> -    pr_debug("irq-xilinx: hwirq=%d, irq=%d\n", hwirq, irq);
>>> -
>>> -    return irq;
>>> -}
>>> -
>>>  static int xintc_map(struct irq_domain *d, unsigned int irq,
>>> irq_hw_number_t hw)
>>>  {
>>>      struct xintc_irq_chip *irqc = d->host_data;
>>> @@ -177,6 +163,25 @@ static void xil_intc_irq_handler(struct irq_desc
>>> *desc)
>>>      chained_irq_exit(chip, desc);
>>>  }
>>>
>>> +static void xil_intc_handle_irq(struct pt_regs *regs)
>>> +{
>>> +    u32 hwirq;
>>> +    struct xintc_irq_chip *irqc = primary_intc;
>>> +
>>> +    do {
>>> +        hwirq = xintc_read(irqc, IVR);
>>> +        if (likely(hwirq != -1U)) {
>>> +            int ret;
>>> +
>>> +            ret = handle_domain_irq(irqc->root_domain, hwirq, regs);
>>> +            WARN_ONCE(ret, "Unhandled HWIRQ %d\n", hwirq);
>>> +            continue;
>>> +        }
>>> +
>>> +        break;
>>> +    } while (1);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>>  static int __init xilinx_intc_of_init(struct device_node *intc,
>>>                           struct device_node *parent)
>>>  {
>>> @@ -246,6 +251,7 @@ static int __init xilinx_intc_of_init(struct
>>> device_node *intc,
>>>      } else {
>>>          primary_intc = irqc;
>>>          irq_set_default_host(primary_intc->root_domain);
>>> +        set_handle_irq(xil_intc_handle_irq);
>>>      }
>>>
>>>      return 0;
>>>
>>
>> Stephen reported compilation issue when this patch is applied because of
>> removal of xintc_get_irq() which is also used by ancient ppc405/ppc440
>> xilinx platforms. I have reported this twice to Marc already last week.
>
> Did you? I can't possibly find these emails.

Stephen was using your arm.com email.

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-next/48d3232d-0f1d-42ea-3109-f44bbabfa2e8@xilinx.com/

>
>> On Friday I have also send v1 of removal of that platforms (need to
>> send v2)
>> https://lore.kernel.org/alsa-devel/cover.1585311091.git.michal.simek@xilinx.com/
>>
>
> You want to remove exising platforms two days before the start of the
> merge window?
> I don't think this is acceptable with such short notice.

I also don't think that will go through.

>
>> That's why please really consider next steps and let us know.
>
> I think the only option is to revert (at least partially) the Xilinx
> series.

Unfortunately.

Thanks,
Michal