[PATCH V2 2/2] irqchip/sifive-plic: Add thead,c9xx-plic support
Heiko Stübner
heiko at sntech.de
Tue Oct 12 16:06:35 PDT 2021
Hi,
Am Dienstag, 12. Oktober 2021, 18:40:26 CEST schrieb Anup Patel:
> On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 9:04 PM <guoren at kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > From: Guo Ren <guoren at linux.alibaba.com>
> >
> > thead,c9xx-plic would mask IRQ with readl(claim), so it needn't
> > mask/unmask which needed in RISC-V PLIC.
> >
> > When in IRQS_ONESHOT & IRQCHIP_EOI_THREADED path, unnecessary mask
> > operation would cause a blocking irq bug in thead,c9xx-plic. Because
> > when IRQ is disabled in c9xx, writel(hwirq, claim) would be invalid.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Guo Ren <guoren at linux.alibaba.com>
> > Cc: Anup Patel <anup at brainfault.org>
> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx at linutronix.de>
> > Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz at kernel.org>
> > Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer at dabbelt.com>
> > Cc: Atish Patra <atish.patra at wdc.com>
> >
> > ---
> >
> > Changes since V2:
> > - Add a separate compatible string "thead,c9xx-plic"
> > - set irq_mask/unmask of "plic_chip" to NULL and point
> > irq_enable/disable of "plic_chip" to plic_irq_mask/unmask
> > - Add a detailed comment block in plic_init() about the
> > differences in Claim/Completion process of RISC-V PLIC and C9xx
> > PLIC.
> > ---
> > drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c
> > index cf74cfa82045..3756b1c147c3 100644
> > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c
> > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c
> > @@ -79,6 +79,7 @@ struct plic_handler {
> > };
> > static int plic_parent_irq __ro_after_init;
> > static bool plic_cpuhp_setup_done __ro_after_init;
> > +static bool disable_mask_unmask __ro_after_init;
> > static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct plic_handler, plic_handlers);
> >
> > static inline void plic_toggle(struct plic_handler *handler,
> > @@ -181,6 +182,13 @@ static int plic_irqdomain_map(struct irq_domain *d, unsigned int irq,
> > {
> > struct plic_priv *priv = d->host_data;
> >
> > + if (disable_mask_unmask) {
> > + plic_chip.irq_mask = NULL;
> > + plic_chip.irq_unmask = NULL;
> > + plic_chip.irq_enable = plic_irq_unmask;
> > + plic_chip.irq_disable = plic_irq_mask;
> > + }
> > +
> > irq_domain_set_info(d, irq, hwirq, &plic_chip, d->host_data,
> > handle_fasteoi_irq, NULL, NULL);
> > irq_set_noprobe(irq);
> > @@ -390,5 +398,14 @@ static int __init plic_init(struct device_node *node,
> > return error;
> > }
> >
> > +static int __init thead_c9xx_plic_init(struct device_node *node,
> > + struct device_node *parent)
> > +{
> > + disable_mask_unmask = true;
>
> The plic_irqdomain_map() is called for each irq so "plic_chip"
> will be updated multiple times.
>
> You can drop the disable_mask_unmask variable and instead
> directly update "plic_chip" here.
Actually I'd think something more dynamic might be appropriate?
I.e. don't modify the generic plic_chip structure, but define a second
one for this type of chip and reference that one in plic_irqdomain_map
depending on the block found?
According to [0] a system can have multiple PLICs and nothing
guarantees that they'll always be the same variant on future socs
[hardware engineers are very creative]
So adding more stuff that modifies static content used by all PLICs
doesn't really improve driver quality here ;-)
Heiko
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/1839bf9ef91de2358a7e8ecade361f7a@www.loen.fr/T/
>
> > +
> > + return plic_init(node, parent);
> > +}
> > +
> > IRQCHIP_DECLARE(sifive_plic, "sifive,plic-1.0.0", plic_init);
> > IRQCHIP_DECLARE(riscv_plic0, "riscv,plic0", plic_init); /* for legacy systems */
> > +IRQCHIP_DECLARE(thead_c9xx_plic, "thead,c9xx-plic", thead_c9xx_plic_init);
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >
>
> Regards,
> Anup
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-riscv mailing list
> linux-riscv at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
>
More information about the linux-riscv
mailing list