Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1270407 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH 10/14] irqchip/mips-gic: Add a IPI hierarchy domain

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH 10/14] irqchip/mips-gic: Add a IPI hierarchy domain Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2015-11-16 18:30 +0100
    Re: [PATCH 10/14] irqchip/mips-gic: Add a IPI hierarchy domain Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@imgtec.com> - 2015-11-17 11:30 +0100
      Re: [PATCH 10/14] irqchip/mips-gic: Add a IPI hierarchy domain Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2015-11-17 11:40 +0100

#1270407 — Re: [PATCH 10/14] irqchip/mips-gic: Add a IPI hierarchy domain

On Thu, 12 Nov 2015, Qais Yousef wrote:
> Issues I'm seeing:
> 
>     - Device domain would be identical to GIC domain and it would defer
> everything to the parent domain except for the extra level of indirection. No?
 
It's not identical. It's a subset of the GIC domain and it has
different semantics than the IPI domain.

>     - The race condition I mentioned in my earlier email where we must be told
> what hwirqs are available because we can't guarantee there's no real device
> connected to it which could interfere with the operation. We have always to
> work on a pre reserved set defined by the system. Currently GIC hard codes
> this set, but I'll be making it a DT property in the future.

We do that better now as we really don't want to start over when it
turns out that the DT property imposes other issues on it.
 
>     - If we remove the mapping, how can a coprocessor drivers find out the
> reverse mapping to pass the hwirq to the firmware so that it can send and
> listen on the correct hwirqs? I have to say my current patches missed dealing
> with this problem. Now I have something to test my rproc driver on I came to
> realise I haven't added the function to do the reverse mapping.

int ipi_get_hw_irq(int irq)
{
	struct irq_data *d = irq_get_irq_data(irq);
	return d ? irqd_to_hwirq(d);
}
 
Hmm?

Thanks,

	tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1271049

On 11/16/2015 05:24 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> int ipi_get_hw_irq(int irq)
> {
> 	struct irq_data *d = irq_get_irq_data(irq);
> 	return d ? irqd_to_hwirq(d);
> }
>   
> Hmm?
>

We need cpu as an argument too.

Taking your other comments into account and ignoring the random mapping 
space for now. I think I can expand that to do the right thing for when 
the IPI domain is per cpu or consecutive.

Thanks,
Qais
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1271059

On Tue, 17 Nov 2015, Qais Yousef wrote:
> On 11/16/2015 05:24 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > 
> > int ipi_get_hw_irq(int irq)
> > {
> > 	struct irq_data *d = irq_get_irq_data(irq);
> > 	return d ? irqd_to_hwirq(d);
> > }
> >   Hmm?
> > 
> 
> We need cpu as an argument too.

Indeed.
 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web