[PATCH V4 1/3] irqchip/sifive-plic: Add thead,c900-plic support

[Samuel Holland]

On 10/15/21 10:21 PM, guoren at kernel.org wrote:
> From: Guo Ren <guoren at linux.alibaba.com>
> 
> 1) The irq_mask/unmask() is used by handle_fasteoi_irq() is mostly
> for ONESHOT irqs and there is no limitation in the RISC-V PLIC driver
> due to use of irq_mask/unmask() callbacks. In fact, a lot of irqchip
> drivers using handle_fasteoi_irq() also implement irq_mask/unmask().
> 
> 2) The C9xx PLIC does not comply with the interrupt claim/completion
> process defined by the RISC-V PLIC specification because C9xx PLIC
> will mask an IRQ when it is claimed by PLIC driver (i.e. readl(claim)
> and the IRQ will be unmasked upon completion by PLIC driver (i.e.
> writel(claim). This behaviour breaks the handling of IRQS_ONESHOT by
> the generic handle_fasteoi_irq() used in the PLIC driver.
> 
> 3) This patch adds an errata fix for IRQS_ONESHOT handling on
> C9xx PLIC by using irq_enable/disable() callbacks instead of
> irq_mask/unmask().
> 
> 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 V4:
>  - Update comment by Anup
> 
> Changes since V3:
>  - Rename "c9xx" to "c900"
>  - Add sifive_plic_chip and thead_plic_chip for difference
> 
> 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 | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c
> index cf74cfa82045..960b29d02070 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c
> @@ -166,7 +166,7 @@ static void plic_irq_eoi(struct irq_data *d)
>  	writel(d->hwirq, handler->hart_base + CONTEXT_CLAIM);
>  }
>  
> -static struct irq_chip plic_chip = {
> +static struct irq_chip sifive_plic_chip = {
>  	.name		= "SiFive PLIC",
>  	.irq_mask	= plic_irq_mask,
>  	.irq_unmask	= plic_irq_unmask,
> @@ -176,12 +176,32 @@ static struct irq_chip plic_chip = {
>  #endif
>  };
>  
> +/*
> + * The C9xx PLIC does not comply with the interrupt claim/completion
> + * process defined by the RISC-V PLIC specification because C9xx PLIC
> + * will mask an IRQ when it is claimed by PLIC driver (i.e. readl(claim)
> + * and the IRQ will be unmasked upon completion by PLIC driver (i.e.
> + * writel(claim). This behaviour breaks the handling of IRQS_ONESHOT by
> + * the generic handle_fasteoi_irq() used in the PLIC driver.
> + */
> +static struct irq_chip thead_plic_chip = {
> +	.name		= "T-Head PLIC",
> +	.irq_disable	= plic_irq_mask,
> +	.irq_enable	= plic_irq_unmask,
> +	.irq_eoi	= plic_irq_eoi,
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> +	.irq_set_affinity = plic_set_affinity,
> +#endif
I tested this, and it doesn't work. Without IRQCHIP_EOI_THREADED,
.irq_eoi is called at the end of the hard IRQ handler. This unmasks the
IRQ before the irqthread has a chance to run, so it causes an interrupt
storm for any threaded level IRQ (I saw this happen for sun8i_thermal).

With IRQCHIP_EOI_THREADED, .irq_eoi is delayed until after the irqthread
runs. This is good. Except that the call to unmask_threaded_irq() is
inside a check for IRQD_IRQ_MASKED. And IRQD_IRQ_MASKED will never be
set because .irq_mask is NULL. So the end result is that the IRQ is
never EOI'd and is masked permanently.

If you set .flags = IRQCHIP_EOI_THREADED, and additionally set .irq_mask
and .irq_unmask to a dummy function that does nothing, the IRQ core will
properly set/unset IRQD_IRQ_MASKED, and the IRQs will flow as expected.
But adding dummy functions seems not so ideal, so I am not sure if this
is the best solution.

Regards,
Samuel

> +};
> +
> +static struct irq_chip *def_plic_chip = &sifive_plic_chip;
> +
>  static int plic_irqdomain_map(struct irq_domain *d, unsigned int irq,
>  			      irq_hw_number_t hwirq)
>  {
>  	struct plic_priv *priv = d->host_data;
>  
> -	irq_domain_set_info(d, irq, hwirq, &plic_chip, d->host_data,
> +	irq_domain_set_info(d, irq, hwirq, def_plic_chip, d->host_data,
>  			    handle_fasteoi_irq, NULL, NULL);
>  	irq_set_noprobe(irq);
>  	irq_set_affinity(irq, &priv->lmask);
> @@ -390,5 +410,15 @@ static int __init plic_init(struct device_node *node,
>  	return error;
>  }
>  
> +static int __init thead_c900_plic_init(struct device_node *node,
> +		struct device_node *parent)
> +{
> +	def_plic_chip = &thead_plic_chip;
> +
> +	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_c900_plic, "thead,c900-plic", thead_c900_plic_init);
> +IRQCHIP_DECLARE(allwinner_sun20i_d1_plic, "allwinner,sun20i-d1-plic", thead_c900_plic_init);
>