Messages in this thread | | | From | "Richter, Robert" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 07/10] irqchip/gic-v3-its: Split probing from its node initialization | Date | Fri, 9 Nov 2018 07:58:30 +0000 |
| |
On 08.11.18 11:25:24, Julien Thierry wrote: > On 07/11/18 22:03, Robert Richter wrote:
> >-static int its_init_domain(struct fwnode_handle *handle, struct its_node *its) > >+static int its_init_domain(struct its_node *its) > > { > > struct irq_domain *inner_domain; > > struct msi_domain_info *info; > >@@ -3384,7 +3385,8 @@ static int its_init_domain(struct fwnode_handle *handle, struct its_node *its) > > if (!info) > > return -ENOMEM; > > > >- inner_domain = irq_domain_create_tree(handle, &its_domain_ops, its); > >+ inner_domain = irq_domain_create_tree(its->fwnode_handle, > >+ &its_domain_ops, its); > > Separate change? > > > if (!inner_domain) { > > kfree(info); > > return -ENOMEM; > >@@ -3441,8 +3443,7 @@ static int its_init_vpe_domain(void) > > return 0; > > } > > > >-static int __init its_compute_its_list_map(struct resource *res, > >- void __iomem *its_base) > >+static int __init its_compute_its_list_map(struct its_node *its) > > { > > int its_number; > > u32 ctlr; > >@@ -3456,15 +3457,15 @@ static int __init its_compute_its_list_map(struct resource *res, > > its_number = find_first_zero_bit(&its_list_map, GICv4_ITS_LIST_MAX); > > if (its_number >= GICv4_ITS_LIST_MAX) { > > pr_err("ITS@%pa: No ITSList entry available!\n", > >- &res->start); > >+ &its->phys_base); > > return -EINVAL; > > } > > > >- ctlr = readl_relaxed(its_base + GITS_CTLR); > >+ ctlr = readl_relaxed(its->base + GITS_CTLR); > > ctlr &= ~GITS_CTLR_ITS_NUMBER; > > ctlr |= its_number << GITS_CTLR_ITS_NUMBER_SHIFT; > >- writel_relaxed(ctlr, its_base + GITS_CTLR); > >- ctlr = readl_relaxed(its_base + GITS_CTLR); > >+ writel_relaxed(ctlr, its->base + GITS_CTLR); > >+ ctlr = readl_relaxed(its->base + GITS_CTLR); > > This (removal of its_base parameter) also feel like a separate change.
In a separate change the motivation of the change would not be obvious. While the change of the variable itself is trivial from the perspective of review and testing, I decided to keep it in the context of the overall change of this patch.
> > Also, I would define a local variable its_base to avoid dereferencing > its every time in order to get the base address.
Hmm, there is not much difference in reading the code then, while the use of a local variable just adds more code without benefit. The compiler does not care as the value is probably stored in a register anyway. There are also other struct members, should all of them being mirrored in a local variable?
> > > if ((ctlr & GITS_CTLR_ITS_NUMBER) != (its_number << GITS_CTLR_ITS_NUMBER_SHIFT)) { > > its_number = ctlr & GITS_CTLR_ITS_NUMBER; > > its_number >>= GITS_CTLR_ITS_NUMBER_SHIFT; > >@@ -3472,83 +3473,110 @@ static int __init its_compute_its_list_map(struct resource *res, > > > > if (test_and_set_bit(its_number, &its_list_map)) { > > pr_err("ITS@%pa: Duplicate ITSList entry %d\n", > >- &res->start, its_number); > >+ &its->phys_base, its_number); > > return -EINVAL; > > } > > > > return its_number; > > } > > > >+static void its_free(struct its_node *its) > >+{ > >+ raw_spin_lock(&its_lock); > >+ list_del(&its->entry); > >+ raw_spin_unlock(&its_lock); > >+ > >+ kfree(its); > >+} > >+ > >+static int __init its_init_one(struct its_node *its); > > You might as well define its_init_one here, no?
This is an intermediate definition that will be removed in a later patch. Moving the whole code here would make the change less readable.
> > >+ > > static int __init its_probe_one(struct resource *res, > > struct fwnode_handle *handle, int numa_node) > > { > > struct its_node *its; > >+ int err; > >+ > >+ its = kzalloc(sizeof(*its), GFP_KERNEL); > >+ if (!its) > >+ return -ENOMEM; > >+ > >+ raw_spin_lock_init(&its->lock); > >+ INIT_LIST_HEAD(&its->entry); > >+ INIT_LIST_HEAD(&its->its_device_list); > >+ its->fwnode_handle = handle; > >+ its->phys_base = res->start; > >+ its->phys_size = resource_size(res); > >+ its->numa_node = numa_node; > >+ > >+ raw_spin_lock(&its_lock); > >+ list_add_tail(&its->entry, &its_nodes); > >+ raw_spin_unlock(&its_lock); > >+ > >+ pr_info("ITS %pR\n", res); > >+ > >+ err = its_init_one(its); > >+ if (err) > >+ its_free(its); > >+ > >+ return err; > >+} > >+ > >+static int __init its_init_one(struct its_node *its) > >+{ > > void __iomem *its_base; > > u32 val, ctlr; > > u64 baser, tmp, typer; > > int err; > > > >- its_base = ioremap(res->start, resource_size(res)); > >+ its_base = ioremap(its->phys_base, its->phys_size); > > if (!its_base) { > >- pr_warn("ITS@%pa: Unable to map ITS registers\n", &res->start); > >- return -ENOMEM; > >+ pr_warn("ITS@%pa: Unable to map ITS registers\n", &its->phys_base); > >+ err = -ENOMEM; > >+ goto fail; > > } > > > > val = readl_relaxed(its_base + GITS_PIDR2) & GIC_PIDR2_ARCH_MASK; > > if (val != 0x30 && val != 0x40) { > >- pr_warn("ITS@%pa: No ITS detected, giving up\n", &res->start); > >+ pr_warn("ITS@%pa: No ITS detected, giving up\n", &its->phys_base); > > err = -ENODEV; > > goto out_unmap; > > } > > > > err = its_force_quiescent(its_base); > > if (err) { > >- pr_warn("ITS@%pa: Failed to quiesce, giving up\n", &res->start); > >+ pr_warn("ITS@%pa: Failed to quiesce, giving up\n", &its->phys_base); > > goto out_unmap; > > } > > > >- pr_info("ITS %pR\n", res); > >- > >- its = kzalloc(sizeof(*its), GFP_KERNEL); > >- if (!its) { > >- err = -ENOMEM; > >- goto out_unmap; > >- } > >- > >- raw_spin_lock_init(&its->lock); > >- INIT_LIST_HEAD(&its->entry); > >- INIT_LIST_HEAD(&its->its_device_list); > > typer = gic_read_typer(its_base + GITS_TYPER); > > its->base = its_base; > >- its->phys_base = res->start; > > its->ite_size = GITS_TYPER_ITT_ENTRY_SIZE(typer); > > its->device_ids = GITS_TYPER_DEVBITS(typer); > > its->is_v4 = !!(typer & GITS_TYPER_VLPIS); > > if (its->is_v4) { > > if (!(typer & GITS_TYPER_VMOVP)) { > >- err = its_compute_its_list_map(res, its_base); > >+ err = its_compute_its_list_map(its); > > if (err < 0) > >- goto out_free_its; > >+ goto out_unmap; > > > > its->list_nr = err; > > > > pr_info("ITS@%pa: Using ITS number %d\n", > >- &res->start, err); > >+ &its->phys_base, err); > > } else { > >- pr_info("ITS@%pa: Single VMOVP capable\n", &res->start); > >+ pr_info("ITS@%pa: Single VMOVP capable\n", > >+ &its->phys_base); > > } > > } > > > >- its->numa_node = numa_node; > >- > > its->cmd_base = (void *)__get_free_pages(GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ZERO, > > get_order(ITS_CMD_QUEUE_SZ)); > > if (!its->cmd_base) { > > err = -ENOMEM; > >- goto out_free_its; > >+ goto out_unmap; > > } > > its->cmd_write = its->cmd_base; > >- its->fwnode_handle = handle; > > its->get_msi_base = its_irq_get_msi_base; > > its->msi_domain_flags = IRQ_DOMAIN_FLAG_MSI_REMAP; > > > >@@ -3597,13 +3625,11 @@ static int __init its_probe_one(struct resource *res, > > if (GITS_TYPER_HCC(typer)) > > its->flags |= ITS_FLAGS_SAVE_SUSPEND_STATE; > > > >- err = its_init_domain(handle, its); > >+ err = its_init_domain(its); > > I'm not sure what is the logic for "this goes in probe, this goes in init?".
It is fairly simple, gic-its register access is done in init. Everything that is detected during devicetree or ACPI device discovery is done in the probe function that collects all data in struct its_node.
> > > if (err) > > goto out_free_tables; > > > >- raw_spin_lock(&its_lock); > >- list_add_tail(&its->entry, &its_nodes); > >- raw_spin_unlock(&its_lock); > >+ pr_info("ITS@%pa: ITS node added\n", &its->phys_base); > > > > return 0;
Thanks,
-Robert
| |