[PATCH v9 15/15] irqchip: mbigen: Add ACPI support
Lorenzo Pieralisi
lorenzo.pieralisi at arm.com
Mon Mar 27 08:27:03 PDT 2017
[+Al,Darren to comment on _DSD review process]
On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 12:24:45PM +0000, Gabriele Paoloni wrote:
> Hi Marc Many thanks for your comments
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: linuxarm-bounces at huawei.com [mailto:linuxarm-bounces at huawei.com]
> > On Behalf Of Marc Zyngier
> > Sent: 27 March 2017 09:47
> > To: John Garry; Lorenzo Pieralisi; Guohanjun (Hanjun Guo)
> > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki; Yimin (Leo); Greg KH; Linuxarm; linux-
> > kernel at vger.kernel.org; Sinan Kaya; linux-acpi at vger.kernel.org; Hanjun
> > Guo; Tomasz Nowicki; Thomas Gleixner; linux-arm-
> > kernel at lists.infradead.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 15/15] irqchip: mbigen: Add ACPI support
> >
> > Hanjun, John,
> >
> > On 22/03/17 14:12, John Garry wrote:
> > > On 21/03/2017 14:45, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> > >> On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 08:40:10PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> > >>> From: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo at linaro.org>
> > >>>
> > >>> With the preparation of platform msi support and interrupt producer
> > >>> in DSDT, we can add mbigen ACPI support now.
> > >>>
> > >>> We are using Interrupt resource type in _CRS methd to indicate
> > number
> > >>> of irq pins instead of num_pins in DT to avoid _DSD usage in this
> > case.
> > >>>
> > >>> For mbigen,
> > >>> Device(MBI0) {
> > >>> Name(_HID, "HISI0152")
> > >>> Name(_UID, Zero)
> > >>> Name(_CRS, ResourceTemplate() {
> > >>> Memory32Fixed(ReadWrite, 0xa0080000, 0x10000)
> > >>> Interrupt(ResourceProducer,...) {12,14,....}
> > >>
> > >> What do these interrupt numbers represent ? This looks wrong to me.
> > >> An interrupt descriptor is there to describe the interrupts a device
> > >> can generate; you are using it just to add a "standard" (that is
> > >> not standard at all) way of counting the number of vectors allocated
> > >> to this specific chip and that's just wrong.
> > >>
> > >
> > > As I understand, the count of interrupts we are declaring for the
> > mbigen
> > > is the same as the sum of interrupts for that mbigen's children.
> > >
> > > So at the point we probe the mbigen, can we just deference the
> > children
> > > to count their interrupts, and use this as the #msis?
> > >
> > >> Can't you use something like Agustin did in the QCOM combiner:
> > >>
> > >> drivers/irqchip/qcom-irq-combiner.c
> > >>
> > >> to detect the MSI vector length (ie by describing the MBIgen through
> > >> generic registers and use the bit width to compute the vector
> > >> lenght) ? I am not sure how feasible it is given that my knowledge
> > >> of MBIgen is pretty poor.
> > >>
> > >> I understand we want to avoid _DSD properties but we should not
> > >> work around standard bindings to achieve that goal.
> > >>
> > >
> > > We use "num-pins" for dt solution, but it is not so welcome here.
> >
> > Well, this device is already completely out of any standard description
> > on the ACPI side. And given that it bloats both the ACPI tables and the
> > kernel data structures, I can only suggest that you take advantage of
> > _DSD here, as misusing the standard properties is not something that we
> > should condone. It will also make the driver more manageable, as it
> > will
> > use similar properties on both firmware implementations.
> >
> > I feel like I need to stress the urgency here. We're at -rc4, and still
> > with unsolved issues. None of us want to miss the next merge window.
> >
>
> As follow up our guys would work on a solution whose ACPI table looks
> like the following one:
>
> For mbigen,
> Device(MBI0) {
> Name(_HID, "HISI0152")
> Name(_UID, Zero)
> Name(_CRS, ResourceTemplate() {
> Memory32Fixed(ReadWrite, 0xa0080000, 0x10000)
> })
>
> Name(_DSD, Package () {
> ToUUID("daffd814-6eba-4d8c-8a91-bc9bbf4aa301"),
> Package ()
> {
> Package () {"num-pins", xxx}
> }
> })
> }
>
> For devices,
> Device(COM0) {
> Name(_HID, "ACPIIDxx")
> Name(_UID, Zero)
> Name(_CRS, ResourceTemplate() {
> Memory32Fixed(ReadWrite, 0xb0030000, 0x10000)
> Interrupt(ResourceConsumer,..., "\_SB.MBI0") {12}
> })
> }
>
>
> Marc, Lorenzo if you are ok with the above we will submit v10 based on this...
I am ok with it. I am not 100% up-to-date on what's the status on _DSD
bindings/review/guidelines but it would be certainly a good idea to
kickstart the process for MBIgen which basically means following this
as far as I know (and post to the relevant mailing list):
https://github.com/ahs3/dsd/blob/master/documentation/process_rules.txt
Al and Darren may add to that as they have more insights.
I would like to send IORT patches to Catalin as soon as possible so
as Marc pointed out the sooner we sort this out the better.
Thanks,
Lorenzo
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list