Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] irqchip/gic-v2m: Add support for multiple MSI frames | From | Suravee Suthikulanit <> | Date | Wed, 14 Oct 2015 10:30:22 -0500 |
| |
On 10/14/2015 10:28 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 14/10/15 15:13, Suravee Suthikulanit wrote: >> Hi Marc, >> >> On 10/14/2015 6:27 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote: >>> The GICv2m driver is so far limited to a single MSI frame, but >>> nothing prevents an implementation from having several of them. >>> >>> This patch expands the driver to enumerate all frames, keeping >>> the first one as the canonical identifier for the MSI domains. >>> >>> Tested-by: Duc Dang <dhdang@apm.com> >>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v2m.c | 124 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------- >>> 1 file changed, 78 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v2m.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v2m.c >>> index bf9b3c0..87f8d10 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v2m.c >>> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v2m.c >>> @@ -50,8 +50,12 @@ >>> /* List of flags for specific v2m implementation */ >>> #define GICV2M_NEEDS_SPI_OFFSET 0x00000001 >>> >>> +static LIST_HEAD(v2m_nodes); >>> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(v2m_lock); >>> + >>> struct v2m_data { >>> - spinlock_t msi_cnt_lock; >>> + struct list_head entry; >>> + struct device_node *node; >> >> Would it be better if we use struct fwnode_handle * here instead. I >> noticed that later on, this is also used as of_node_to_fwnode(v2m->node) >> in several places. Also, this would need to change anyways when we >> introducing ACPI support (see here https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/10/13/846). > > I was thinking that it would be part of your series adapting it to ACPI. > I don't mind either way... > > Thanks, > > M. >
Ok, I'll rebase the GICv2m ACPI support on top of this multi-frame change and send out V2 If this won't be changing again any time soon.
Thanks, Suravee
| |