From: Darius Rad <darius@bluespec.com>
To: Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>
Cc: "Guo Ren" <guoren@kernel.org>, "Marc Zyngier" <maz@kernel.org>,
"Samuel Holland" <samuel@sholland.org>,
"Atish Patra" <atish.patra@wdc.com>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
"Heiko Stübner" <heiko@sntech.de>,
"Rob Herring" <robh@kernel.org>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-riscv <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
"Guo Ren" <guoren@linux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/3] irqchip/sifive-plic: Add thead,c900-plic support
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 14:01:58 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YXBZlrz2ythccKp0@bruce.bluespec.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAhSdy1FS+rTO8JWfqKVMLPBUOzmy0d5D1s=psfxbm4s6QrBCA@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 09:48:36PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 8:29 PM Darius Rad <darius@bluespec.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 10:19:06PM +0800, Guo Ren wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 9:34 PM Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 19 Oct 2021 14:27:02 +0100,
> > > > Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 6:18 PM Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, 19 Oct 2021 10:33:49 +0100,
> > > > > > Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If you have an 'automask' behavior and yet the HW doesn't record this
> > > > > > > > in a separate bit, then you need to track this by yourself in the
> > > > > > > > irq_eoi() callback instead. I guess that you would skip the write to
> > > > > > > > the CLAIM register in this case, though I have no idea whether this
> > > > > > > > breaks
> > > > > > > > the HW interrupt state or not.
> > > > > > > The problem is when enable bit is 0 for that irq_number,
> > > > > > > "writel(d->hwirq, handler->hart_base + CONTEXT_CLAIM)" wouldn't affect
> > > > > > > the hw state machine. Then this irq would enter in ack state and no
> > > > > > > continues irqs could come in.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Really? This means that you cannot mask an interrupt while it is being
> > > > > > handled? How great...
> > > > > If the completion ID does not match an interrupt source that is
> > > > > currently enabled for the target, the completion is silently ignored.
> > > > > So, C9xx completion depends on enable-bit.
> > > >
> > > > Is that what the PLIC spec says? Or what your implementation does? I
> > > > can understand that one implementation would be broken, but if the
> > > > PLIC architecture itself is broken, that's far more concerning.
> > >
> > > Here is the description of Interrupt Completion in PLIC spec [1]:
> > >
> > > The PLIC signals it has completed executing an interrupt handler by
> > > writing the interrupt ID it received from the claim to the claim/complete
> > > register. The PLIC does not check whether the completion ID is the same
> > > as the last claim ID for that target. If the completion ID does not match
> > > an interrupt source that is currently enabled for the target, the
> > > ^^ ^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^
> > > completion is silently ignored.
> > >
> > > [1] https://github.com/riscv/riscv-plic-spec/blob/master/riscv-plic.adoc
> > >
> > > Did we misunderstand the PLIC spec?
> > >
> >
> > That clause sounds to me like it is due to the SiFive implementation, which
> > the RISC-V PLIC specification is based on. Since the PLIC spec is still a
> > draft I would expect it to change before release.
>
> The SiFive PLIC has been adopted by various RISC-V platforms (including
> SiFive themselves). Almost all existing RISC-V boards have PLIC as the
> interrupt controller.
>
> Considering the wide usage of PLIC across existing platforms, the RISC-V
> International has adopted it as an official RISC-V non-ISA spec. ...
You mean is in the process of adopting it, right?
> ... Of course,
> the RISC-V PLIC spec needs to follow the process for RISC-V non-ISA spec
> but changing the RISC-V PLIC spec now would mean all existing RISC-V
> platforms will become non-compliant.
>
I would expect the review process to produce a proper specification, rather
than a verbatim copy of the SiFive datasheet, and clarify some ambgiuous
and implementation specific language. Clarifying the specification does
not necessarily make all existing implementations non-compliant, as this
has been done numerous times with other RISC-V specifications.
> The RISC-V AIA spec is intended to replace the RISC-V PLIC spec as the
> new interrupt controller spec for future RISC-V platforms.
>
> Regards,
> Anup
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-riscv mailing list
> linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-20 18:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-16 3:21 [PATCH V4 0/3] irqchip: riscv: Add thead,c900-plic support guoren
2021-10-16 3:21 ` [PATCH V4 1/3] irqchip/sifive-plic: " guoren
2021-10-18 5:17 ` Samuel Holland
2021-10-18 5:40 ` Anup Patel
2021-10-18 7:05 ` Guo Ren
2021-10-18 7:21 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-10-19 9:33 ` Guo Ren
2021-10-19 10:18 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-10-19 13:27 ` Guo Ren
2021-10-20 13:34 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-10-20 14:19 ` Guo Ren
2021-10-20 14:59 ` Darius Rad
2021-10-20 16:18 ` Anup Patel
2021-10-20 18:01 ` Darius Rad [this message]
2021-10-21 8:47 ` Anup Patel
2021-10-20 14:33 ` Anup Patel
2021-10-20 15:08 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-10-20 16:08 ` Anup Patel
2021-10-20 16:48 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-10-21 8:52 ` Anup Patel
2021-10-21 1:46 ` Guo Ren
2021-10-21 2:00 ` Guo Ren
2021-10-21 8:33 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-10-21 9:43 ` Guo Ren
2021-10-16 3:21 ` [PATCH V4 2/3] dt-bindings: update riscv plic compatible string guoren
2021-10-16 7:07 ` Andreas Schwab
2021-10-16 9:16 ` Guo Ren
2021-10-16 10:34 ` Heiko Stuebner
2021-10-16 12:56 ` Guo Ren
2021-10-16 16:31 ` Heiko Stuebner
2021-10-20 12:15 ` Guo Ren
2021-10-18 12:02 ` Rob Herring
2021-10-19 0:55 ` Guo Ren
2021-10-16 3:22 ` [PATCH V4 3/3] dt-bindings: vendor-prefixes: add T-Head Semiconductor guoren
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=YXBZlrz2ythccKp0@bruce.bluespec.com \
--to=darius@bluespec.com \
--cc=anup@brainfault.org \
--cc=atish.patra@wdc.com \
--cc=guoren@kernel.org \
--cc=guoren@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=heiko@sntech.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=samuel@sholland.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