lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Sep]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Possible Spam [PATCH v2 2/2] ARM: irqchip: mxs: add Alpascale ASM9260 support
From
Date
Am 18.09.2015 um 12:42 schrieb Marc Zyngier:
> On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 11:18:42 +0200
> Oleksij Rempel <linux@rempel-privat.de> wrote:
>
>> From: Oleksij Rempel <external.Oleksij.Rempel@de.bosch.com>
>>
>> Freescale iMX23/iMX28 and Alphascale ASM9260 have similar
>
> Is it Alphascale or Alpascale? You may need to fix the patch title.

ok.

>
>> interrupt collectors. It makes easy to reuse irq-mxs code for ASM9260.
>> Differences between this devices are fallowing:
>> - different register offsets
>> - different count of intterupt lines per register
>> - ASM9260 don't provide reset bit
>> - ASM9260 don't support FIQ.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Oleksij Rempel <external.Oleksij.Rempel@de.bosch.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/irqchip/Kconfig | 5 ++
>> drivers/irqchip/Makefile | 2 +-
>> drivers/irqchip/alphascale_asm9260-icoll.h | 109 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> drivers/irqchip/irq-mxs.c | 106 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>> 4 files changed, 220 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> create mode 100644 drivers/irqchip/alphascale_asm9260-icoll.h
>>
>
> [...]
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-mxs.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-mxs.c
>> index 14374de..1470087 100644
>> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-mxs.c
>> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-mxs.c
>> @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
>> /*
>> * Copyright (C) 2009-2010 Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
>> + * Copyright (C) 2014 Oleksij Rempel <linux@rempel-privat.de>
>> + * Add Alphascale ASM9260 support.
>> *
>> * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
>> * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
>> @@ -28,6 +30,8 @@
>> #include <linux/stmp_device.h>
>> #include <asm/exception.h>
>>
>> +#include "alphascale_asm9260-icoll.h"
>> +
>> /*
>> * this device provide 4 offsets for each register:
>> * 0x0 - plain read write mode
>> @@ -49,6 +53,11 @@
>>
>> #define ICOLL_NUM_IRQS 128
>>
>> +enum icoll_type {
>> + ICOLL,
>> + ASM9260_ICOLL,
>> +};
>> +
>> struct icoll_priv {
>> void __iomem *vector;
>> void __iomem *levelack;
>> @@ -58,10 +67,38 @@ struct icoll_priv {
>> /* number of interrupts per register */
>> int ;
>> void __iomem *clear;
>> + enum icoll_type type;
>> };
>>
>> static struct icoll_priv icoll_priv;
>> static struct irq_domain *icoll_domain;
>> +static DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(icoll_lock);
>> +
>> +/* calculate bit offset depending on number of intterupt per register */
>> +static u32 icoll_intr_bitshift(struct irq_data *d, u32 bit)
>> +{
>> + /*
>> + * We expect intr_per_reg to be 4 or 1, it means
>> + * "n" will be 3 or 0.
>> + */
>> + int n = icoll_priv.intr_per_reg - 1;
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * If n = 0, "bit" is never shifted.
>> + * If n = 3, mask lower part of hwirq to convert it
>> + * in 0, 1, 2 or 3 and then multiply it by 8 (or shift by 3)
>> + */
>> + return bit << ((d->hwirq & n) << n);
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* calculate mem offset depending on number of intterupt per register */
>> +static void __iomem *icoll_intr_reg(struct irq_data *d)
>> +{
>> + int n = icoll_priv.intr_per_reg >> 1;
>> +
>> + /* offset = hwirq / intr_per_reg * 0x10 */
>> + return icoll_priv.intr + ((d->hwirq >> n) * 0x10);
>> +}
>
> Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like these function are
> only useful when used on ams9260. So why do we need intr_per_reg at
> all? MXS doesn't need it (always 1), and ams9260 always need it (always
> 4). Save yourself some previous cycles and simplify the whole thing.

ok.

>>
>> static void icoll_ack_irq(struct irq_data *d)
>> {
>> @@ -86,12 +123,38 @@ static void icoll_unmask_irq(struct irq_data *d)
>> icoll_priv.intr + SET_REG + HW_ICOLL_INTERRUPTn(d->hwirq));
>> }
>>
>> +static void asm9260_mask_irq(struct irq_data *d)
>> +{
>> + raw_spin_lock(&icoll_lock);
>> + __raw_writel(icoll_intr_bitshift(d, BM_ICOLL_INTR_ENABLE),
>> + icoll_intr_reg(d) + CLR_REG);
>> + raw_spin_unlock(&icoll_lock);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void asm9260_unmask_irq(struct irq_data *d)
>> +{
>> + raw_spin_lock(&icoll_lock);
>> + __raw_writel(ASM9260_BM_CLEAR_BIT(d->hwirq),
>> + icoll_priv.clear +
>> + ASM9260_HW_ICOLL_CLEARn(d->hwirq));
>> +
>> + __raw_writel(icoll_intr_bitshift(d, BM_ICOLL_INTR_ENABLE),
>> + icoll_intr_reg(d) + SET_REG);
>> + raw_spin_unlock(&icoll_lock);
>> +}
>
> Can you please explain the rational for this lock? mask/unmask use
> different registers, and it is not obvious to me what race you are
> trying to avoid here.

Uff... in one of earliest reviews i was asked to add lock..
I also was asked to add asm9260 to some existing driver. Not sure if it
is still making sense.

--
Regards,
Oleksij

[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-09-19 08:01    [W:3.240 / U:0.856 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site