lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Apr]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] irqchip/mips-gic: Fix Local compare interrupt
From
Date
Hi Paul,


On 10/04/17 23:06, Paul Burton wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> On Friday, 31 March 2017 04:05:32 PDT Matt Redfearn wrote:
>> Commit 4cfffcfa5106 ("irqchip/mips-gic: Fix local interrupts") added
>> mapping of several local interrupts during initialisation of the gic
>> driver. This associates virq numbers with these interrupts.
>> Unfortunately, as not all of the interrupts are mapped in hardware
>> order, when drivers subsequently request these interrupts they conflict
>> with the mappings that have already been set up. For example, this
>> manifests itself in the gic clocksource driver, which fails to probe
>> with the message:
>>
>> clocksource: GIC: mask: 0xffffffffffffffff max_cycles: 0x7350c9738,
>> max_idle_ns: 440795203769 ns
>> GIC timer IRQ 25 setup failed: -22
>>
>> This is because virq 25 (the correct IRQ number specified via device
>> tree) was allocated to the PERFCTR interrupt (and 24 to the timer, 26 to
>> the FDC).
> I'm confused by this - the DT doesn't specify VIRQs, it specifies hardware IRQ
> numbers. Which VIRQ is used should be irrelevant. Is this on a system using
> gic_clocksource_init() from platform code? (Malta?) and therefore relying on
> MIPS_GIC_IRQ_BASE?

Yes, this is on Malta, which as you say, uses MIPS_GIC_IRQ_BASE. On
Malta that ends up, through the definition of I8259A_IRQ_BASE and
MIPS_CPU_IRQ_BASE, to be 24. Therefore hardware interrupt 1 of the GIC
ends up expecting to be allocated at virq 25. But since 4cfffcfa5106,
that virq number was allocated to the PERFCTR interrupt. Everything
about the order-dependent and hardcoded bases of Maltas IRQs seems bad
and needs looking at but this was the easiest fix for this cycle.

>
> If so I think this would be much more cleanly fixed by moving to probe the
> clocksource using DT

Not sure that would help if Maltas expected virq for this source had
already been allocated?

Thanks,
Matt

> than by adding more fragile order-dependent mappings in
> the GIC driver. Perhaps we have to live with it for this cycle though...
>
> Thanks,
> Paul
>
>> To fix this, map all of these local interrupts in the hardware
>> order so as to associate their virq numbers with the correct hw
>> interrupts.
>>
>> Fixes: 4cfffcfa5106 ("irqchip/mips-gic: Fix local interrupts")
>> Signed-off-by: Matt Redfearn <matt.redfearn@imgtec.com>
>> ---
>>
>> drivers/irqchip/irq-mips-gic.c | 4 ++++
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-mips-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-mips-gic.c
>> index 11d12bccc4e7..cd20df12d63d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-mips-gic.c
>> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-mips-gic.c
>> @@ -991,8 +991,12 @@ static void __init gic_map_single_int(struct
>> device_node *node,
>>
>> static void __init gic_map_interrupts(struct device_node *node)
>> {
>> + gic_map_single_int(node, GIC_LOCAL_INT_WD);
>> + gic_map_single_int(node, GIC_LOCAL_INT_COMPARE);
>> gic_map_single_int(node, GIC_LOCAL_INT_TIMER);
>> gic_map_single_int(node, GIC_LOCAL_INT_PERFCTR);
>> + gic_map_single_int(node, GIC_LOCAL_INT_SWINT0);
>> + gic_map_single_int(node, GIC_LOCAL_INT_SWINT1);
>> gic_map_single_int(node, GIC_LOCAL_INT_FDC);
>> }

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-04-11 10:22    [W:0.049 / U:0.420 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site