lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: about cs5536 interrupt ack
8259 problem  seems to be done with the attached patch, IDE hung seems 
to be the dma setting problem.

Thanks all for your advise, comments. I have learned a lot. now I
continue to trace down the IDE problem.

Mao

Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2007, Songmao Tian wrote:
>
>
>>> Huh? Have you managed to find an 8259A clone *that* broken? So what does
>>> it return if you write 0xc to the address 0x20 in the I/O port space and
>>> then read back from that location? You should complain to the
>>>
>>>
>> It's the value of IRR, so guess IRR. AMD has well documented cs5536, I
>> appreciate that.
>>
>
> Indeed. I am surprised they have decided to drop the poll command -- it
> surely does not require much logic as it mostly reuses what's used to
> produce the vector anyway and it is commonly used when 8259A
> implementations are interfaced to non-i386 processors. PPC is another
> example.
>
>
>>> More or less -- 3-5 should probably be the outcome of a single read
>>> transaction from the north bridge. I.e. you issue a read to a "magic"
>>> location, 3-5 happen, and the data value returned is the vector presented by
>>> the interrupt controller on the PCI bus.
>>>
>>>
>> yeah, we can implement a register in north bridge.
>>
>
> Strictly speaking it would not be a register, but a "PCI INTA address
> space" much like PCI memory or I/O port address spaces. Though as the
> former ignores addresses driven on the bus, the space occupied does not
> have to be extensive -- I would assume whatever slot size is available
> with the address decoder you have implemented would do.
>
>
>>> You can still dispatch interrupts manually by examining the IRR register,
>>> but having a way to ask the 8259A's prioritiser would be nice. Although
>>> given such a lethal erratum you report I would not count on the prioritiser
>>> to provide any useful flexibility...
>>>
>>>
>> yeah, that's a straight thought, tried but failed:(, patch followed.
>>
>
> You may have to modify other functions from arch/mips/kernel/i8259.c;
> yes, this makes the whole experience not as pretty as one would hope...
>
> Maciej
>
>
>
>

diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/i8259.c b/arch/mips/kernel/i8259.c
index 9c79703..fd7f4ba 100644
--- a/arch/mips/kernel/i8259.c
+++ b/arch/mips/kernel/i8259.c
@@ -47,11 +47,7 @@ static struct irq_chip i8259A_chip = {
/*
* This contains the irq mask for both 8259A irq controllers,
*/
-static unsigned int cached_irq_mask = 0xffff;
-
-#define cached_master_mask (cached_irq_mask)
-#define cached_slave_mask (cached_irq_mask >> 8)
-
+unsigned int cached_irq_mask = 0xffff;
void disable_8259A_irq(unsigned int irq)
{
unsigned int mask;
diff --git a/include/asm-mips/i8259.h b/include/asm-mips/i8259.h
index e88a016..e7dcf7b 100644
--- a/include/asm-mips/i8259.h
+++ b/include/asm-mips/i8259.h
@@ -37,11 +37,55 @@

extern spinlock_t i8259A_lock;

+extern unsigned int cached_irq_mask;
+#define cached_master_mask (cached_irq_mask)
+#define cached_slave_mask (cached_irq_mask >> 8)
+
extern void init_8259A(int auto_eoi);
extern void enable_8259A_irq(unsigned int irq);
extern void disable_8259A_irq(unsigned int irq);

extern void init_i8259_irqs(void);
+#define CONFIG_NO_INTERRUPT_ACK
+#ifdef CONFIG_NO_INTERRUPT_ACK
+static inline int _byte_ffs(u8 word)
+{
+ int num = 0;
+ if ((word & 0xf) == 0) {
+ num += 4;
+ word >>= 4;
+ }
+ if ((word & 0x3) == 0) {
+ num += 2;
+ word >>= 2;
+ }
+ if ((word & 0x1) == 0)
+ num += 1;
+ return num;
+}
+
+static inline int read_irq(int port)
+{
+ int irq;
+ outb(0x0A, port);
+ if (port == PIC_MASTER_CMD) {
+ irq = inb(port) & ~cached_master_mask;
+ } else {
+ irq = inb(port) & ~cached_slave_mask;
+ }
+ if (irq == 0)
+ return -1;
+ else
+ return _byte_ffs(irq);
+}
+#else
+static inline int read_irq(int port)
+{
+ /* Perform an interrupt acknowledge cycle on controller 1. */
+ outb(0x0C, port); /* prepare for poll */
+ return inb(port) & 7;
+}
+#endif

/*
* Do the traditional i8259 interrupt polling thing. This is for the few
@@ -54,18 +98,16 @@ static inline int i8259_irq(void)

spin_lock(&i8259A_lock);

- /* Perform an interrupt acknowledge cycle on controller 1. */
- outb(0x0C, PIC_MASTER_CMD); /* prepare for poll */
- irq = inb(PIC_MASTER_CMD) & 7;
+ irq = read_irq(PIC_MASTER_CMD);
if (irq == PIC_CASCADE_IR) {
/*
* Interrupt is cascaded so perform interrupt
* acknowledge on controller 2.
*/
- outb(0x0C, PIC_SLAVE_CMD); /* prepare for poll */
- irq = (inb(PIC_SLAVE_CMD) & 7) + 8;
- }
+ irq = read_irq(PIC_SLAVE_CMD) + 8;
+ }

+#ifndef CONFIG_NO_INTERRUPT_ACK
if (unlikely(irq == 7)) {
/*
* This may be a spurious interrupt.
@@ -78,6 +120,11 @@ static inline int i8259_irq(void)
if(~inb(PIC_MASTER_ISR) & 0x80)
irq = -1;
}
+#else
+ if (cached_irq_mask & (1 << irq)) {
+ irq = -1;
+ }
+#endif

spin_unlock(&i8259A_lock);
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-07-12 09:29    [W:0.315 / U:0.548 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site