[PATCH v4 3/5] irqchip/irq-pruss-intc: Add logic for handling reserved interrupts
David Lechner
david at lechnology.com
Wed Jul 29 14:48:43 EDT 2020
On 7/28/20 4:18 AM, Grzegorz Jaszczyk wrote:
> From: Suman Anna <s-anna at ti.com>
>
> The PRUSS INTC has a fixed number of output interrupt lines that are
> connected to a number of processors or other PRUSS instances or other
> devices (like DMA) on the SoC. The output interrupt lines 2 through 9
> are usually connected to the main Arm host processor and are referred
> to as host interrupts 0 through 7 from ARM/MPU perspective.
>
> All of these 8 host interrupts are not always exclusively connected
> to the Arm interrupt controller. Some SoCs have some interrupt lines
> not connected to the Arm interrupt controller at all, while a few others
> have the interrupt lines connected to multiple processors in which they
> need to be partitioned as per SoC integration needs. For example, AM437x
> and 66AK2G SoCs have 2 PRUSS instances each and have the host interrupt 5
> connected to the other PRUSS, while AM335x has host interrupt 0 shared
> between MPU and TSC_ADC and host interrupts 6 & 7 shared between MPU and
> a DMA controller.
>
> Add logic to the PRUSS INTC driver to ignore both these shared and
> invalid interrupts.
If a person wanted to use DMA with a PRU what will handle the mapping
of a PRU event to host interrupt 6 or 7 if they are being ignored here?
>
> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna at ti.com>
> Signed-off-by: Grzegorz Jaszczyk <grzegorz.jaszczyk at linaro.org>
> ---
> v3->v4:
> - Due to changes in DT bindings which converts irqs-reserved
> property from uint8-array to bitmask requested by Rob introduce
> relevant changes in the driver.
> - Merge the irqs-reserved and irqs-shared to one property since they
> can be handled by one logic (relevant change was introduced to DT
> binding).
> - Update commit message.
> v2->v3:
> - Extra checks for (intc->irqs[i]) in error/remove path was moved from
> "irqchip/irq-pruss-intc: Add a PRUSS irqchip driver for PRUSS
> interrupts" to this patch
> v1->v2:
> - https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11069757/
> ---
> drivers/irqchip/irq-pruss-intc.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-pruss-intc.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-pruss-intc.c
> index 45b966a..cf9a59b 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-pruss-intc.c
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-pruss-intc.c
> @@ -474,7 +474,7 @@ static int pruss_intc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> struct pruss_intc *intc;
> struct pruss_host_irq_data *host_data[MAX_NUM_HOST_IRQS] = { NULL };
> int i, irq, ret;
> - u8 max_system_events;
> + u8 max_system_events, invalid_intr = 0;
>
> data = of_device_get_match_data(dev);
> if (!data)
> @@ -496,6 +496,16 @@ static int pruss_intc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> return PTR_ERR(intc->base);
> }
>
> + ret = of_property_read_u8(dev->of_node, "ti,irqs-reserved",
> + &invalid_intr);
Why not make the variable name match the property name?
> +
> + /*
> + * The irqs-reserved is used only for some SoC's therefore not having
> + * this property is still valid
> + */
> + if (ret < 0 && ret != -EINVAL)
> + return ret;
> +
> pruss_intc_init(intc);
>
> mutex_init(&intc->lock);
> @@ -506,6 +516,9 @@ static int pruss_intc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> for (i = 0; i < MAX_NUM_HOST_IRQS; i++) {
> + if (invalid_intr & BIT(i))
> + continue;
> +
> irq = platform_get_irq_byname(pdev, irq_names[i]);
> if (irq <= 0) {
> dev_err(dev, "platform_get_irq_byname failed for %s : %d\n",
> @@ -533,8 +546,11 @@ static int pruss_intc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> return 0;
>
> fail_irq:
> - while (--i >= 0)
> - irq_set_chained_handler_and_data(intc->irqs[i], NULL, NULL);
> + while (--i >= 0) {
> + if (intc->irqs[i])
> + irq_set_chained_handler_and_data(intc->irqs[i], NULL,
> + NULL);
> + }
>
> irq_domain_remove(intc->domain);
>
> @@ -548,8 +564,11 @@ static int pruss_intc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> unsigned int hwirq;
> int i;
>
> - for (i = 0; i < MAX_NUM_HOST_IRQS; i++)
> - irq_set_chained_handler_and_data(intc->irqs[i], NULL, NULL);
> + for (i = 0; i < MAX_NUM_HOST_IRQS; i++) {
> + if (intc->irqs[i])
> + irq_set_chained_handler_and_data(intc->irqs[i], NULL,
> + NULL);
> + }
>
> for (hwirq = 0; hwirq < max_system_events; hwirq++)
> irq_dispose_mapping(irq_find_mapping(intc->domain, hwirq));
>
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list