lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Dec]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    Date
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] of/irq: Add a quirk for controllers with their own definition of interrupt-map
    On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 10:26 AM Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote:
    >
    > On Sun, 05 Dec 2021 22:27:35 +0000,
    > "Lad, Prabhakar" <prabhakar.csengg@gmail.com> wrote:
    > >
    > > On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 4:16 PM Lad, Prabhakar
    > > <prabhakar.csengg@gmail.com> wrote:
    > > >
    > > > On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 2:36 PM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 7:37 AM Lad, Prabhakar
    > > > > <prabhakar.csengg@gmail.com> wrote:
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Hi Marc/Rob,
    > > > > >
    > > > > > On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 6:37 PM Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote:
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 12:52:21 +0000,
    > > > > > > "Lad, Prabhakar" <prabhakar.csengg@gmail.com> wrote:
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 6:33 PM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > interrupts would work just fine here:
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > interrupts = <GIC_SPI 4 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > > > > <GIC_SPI 5 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > > > > <GIC_SPI 6 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > > > > <GIC_SPI 7 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > > > > <GIC_SPI 8 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > > > > <GIC_SPI 9 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > > > > <GIC_SPI 10 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > > > > <GIC_SPI 11 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > We don't need a different solution for N:1 interrupts from N:M. Sure,
    > > > > > > > > that could become unweldy if there are a lot of interrupts (just like
    > > > > > > > > interrupt-map), but is that an immediate problem?
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > It's just that with this approach the driver will have to index the
    > > > > > > > interrupts instead of reading from DT.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Marc - is it OK with the above approach?
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Anything that uses standard properties in a standard way works for me.
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > I added interrupts property now instead of interrupt-map as below:
    > > > > >
    > > > > > irqc: interrupt-controller@110a0000 {
    > > > > > compatible = "renesas,r9a07g044-irqc", "renesas,rzg2l-irqc";
    > > > > > #address-cells = <0>;
    > > > > > interrupt-parent = <&gic>;
    > > > > > interrupt-controller;
    > > > > > reg = <0 0x110a0000 0 0x10000>;
    > > > > > interrupts =
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 0 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 1 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 2 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 3 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 4 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 5 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 6 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 7 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 8 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 444 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 445 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 446 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 447 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 448 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 449 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 450 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 451 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 452 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 453 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 454 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 455 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 456 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 457 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 458 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 459 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 460 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 461 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 462 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 463 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 464 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 465 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 466 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 467 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 468 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 469 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 470 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 471 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 472 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 473 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 474 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
    > > > > > <GIC_SPI 475 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
    > > > > > clocks = <&cpg CPG_MOD R9A07G044_IA55_CLK>,
    > > > > > <&cpg CPG_MOD R9A07G044_IA55_PCLK>;
    > > > > > clock-names = "clk", "pclk";
    > > > > > power-domains = <&cpg>;
    > > > > > resets = <&cpg R9A07G044_IA55_RESETN>;
    > > > > > };
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > In the hierarchal interrupt code its parsed as below:
    > > > > > on probe fetch the details:
    > > > > > range = of_get_property(np, "interrupts", &len);
    > > > > > if (!range)
    > > > > > return -EINVAL;
    > > > > >
    > > > > > for (len /= sizeof(*range), j = 0; len >= 3; len -= 3) {
    > > > > > if (j >= IRQC_NUM_IRQ)
    > > > > > return -EINVAL;
    > > > > >
    > > > > > priv->map[j].args[0] = be32_to_cpu(*range++);
    > > > > > priv->map[j].args[1] = be32_to_cpu(*range++);
    > > > > > priv->map[j].args[2] = be32_to_cpu(*range++);
    > > > > > priv->map[j].args_count = 3;
    > > > > > j++;
    > > > >
    > > > > Not sure what's wrong, but you shouldn't be doing your own parsing.
    > > > > The setup shouldn't look much different than a GPIO controller
    > > > > interrupts except you have multiple parent interrupts.
    > > > >
    > > > Sorry does that mean the IRQ domain should be chained handler and not
    > > > hierarchical? Or is it I have miss-understood.
    >
    > I guess the core DT code allocates the interrupts itself, as if the
    > interrupt controller was the interrupt producer itself (which isn't
    > the case here), bypassing the hierarchical setup altogether.
    >
    > We solved it on the MSI side by not using 'interrupts'. Either we
    > adopt a similar solution for wired interrupts, or we fix the core DT
    > code.
    >
    So maybe for now we go with your earlier suggestion of using
    "interrupt-range"? (And address the core DT in near future)

    Rob, is that OK with you?

    Cheers,
    Prabhakar

    > > >
    > > > If the IRQ domain has to be hierarchical how do we map to the parent?
    > > > (based on the previous reviews Marc had suggested to implement as
    > > > hierarchical [1])
    > > >
    > > Gentle ping.
    >
    > Please move this discussion to the relevant thread.
    >
    > M.
    >
    > --
    > Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2021-12-06 18:06    [W:4.726 / U:0.012 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site